ryanthedev/code-foundations/cc-control-flow-quality

cc-control-flow-quality

Thresholds

The full audit checklists (conditionals, structure, loops, tables): Read(${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/checklists/conditionals-and-structure.md) and Read(${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/checklists/loops-and-advanced.md).

Principles:

• Use true/false, not 0/1, for booleans.
• for/foreach when the iteration count is known; while when not.
• Test at the beginning (may not execute) vs the end (executes at least once).
• Put the nominal case in if, the error case in else — except guard clauses, which invert this intentionally.
• Fully parenthesize complex boolean expressions.

Core patterns

Deep nesting → guard clauses

Guard clauses are an exception pattern: error/invalid cases exit early at the top so the nominal path flows without nesting. Use them at function entry; use "nominal in if" for conditionals within the body.

// BEFORE: arrow-shaped (4 levels), nominal case buried
if (file.validName()) {
    if (file.open()) {
        if (encryptionKey.valid()) {
            if (file.decrypt(encryptionKey)) { /* lots of code */ }
        }
    }
}
 
// AFTER: guard clauses flatten it
if (!file.validName()) return;
if (!file.open()) return;
if (!encryptionKey.valid()) return;
if (!file.decrypt(encryptionKey)) return;
// lots of code (nominal case at top level)

Complex boolean → named intermediate variables

bool printerCanPrint = printerReady && !printerBusy &&
                       paperAvailable && paperLevel > MIN_PAPER;
bool documentCanBePrinted = documentValid && !documentEmpty &&
                            documentSize < MAX_SIZE;
if (inputStatus == SUCCESS && printerCanPrint && documentCanBePrinted) { print(); }

Meaningless loop indexes → descriptive names

// BEFORE: transaction[j][i][k] — is this right? who knows
// AFTER: self-documenting and verifiable
for (int payCodeIdx = 0; payCodeIdx < numPayCodes; payCodeIdx++)
    for (int month = 0; month < 12; month++)
        for (int divisionIdx = 0; divisionIdx < numDivisions; divisionIdx++)
            sum += transaction[month][payCodeIdx][divisionIdx];

Single-use test → named boolean function

Putting a test into a well-named function improves readability, and that alone justifies it — even for a single use [p.433].

bool isProcessableLetter(char c) {
    bool isLetter = (('a' <= c) && (c <= 'z')) || (('A' <= c) && (c <= 'Z'));
    bool isExcluded = (c == 'X') || (c == 'x');
    return isLetter && !isExcluded;
}
if (isProcessableLetter(inputChar)) { processLetter(inputChar); }

Number-line ordering and zero comparisons

if (MIN_VALUE <= count && count <= MAX_VALUE)  // in-range: variable between bounds
if (count < MIN_VALUE || MAX_VALUE < count)    // out-of-range: variable on the outside
 
while (!done)                  // boolean: compare implicitly
while (balance != 0)           // numeric: compare explicitly
while (*charPtr != '\0')       // character: compare to the terminator
while (bufferPtr != NULL)      // pointer: compare to NULL

Loop-with-exit avoids duplication

// AFTER: while(true) + break eliminates the duplicated read at top and bottom
while (true) {
    GetNextRating(&ratingIncrement);
    rating += ratingIncrement;
    if (!((score < targetScore) && (ratingIncrement != 0))) break;
    GetNextScore(&scoreIncrement);
    score += scoreIncrement;
}

Decision guidance

Loop selection

1. Iteration count known ahead of time? → for/foreach, else while.
2. Must the body execute at least once? → test at END (do-while)/MIDDLE, else test at BEGINNING.
3. Simple iteration through a container? → foreach (eliminates housekeeping arithmetic errors).
4. Need to exit from the middle? → loop-with-exit (while(true) + break).

Nesting reduction (least to most invasive — choose by fit, not strict order)

1. Guard clauses — exit early on error conditions.
2. Extract nested code into a well-named routine.
3. Combine nested ifs into a single compound test.
4. Convert to case/switch when testing the same variable repeatedly.
5. Polymorphism — replace type-checking conditionals with dispatch.
6. Table-driven methods — when logic maps data to outcomes.

#5 and #6 are context-dependent, not ranked: tables can be simpler than polymorphism. "The fact that a design uses inheritance and polymorphism doesn't make it a good design" [p.423].

Table-driven methods

Consider a table instead of branching logic when: writing the 4th+ branch in an if-else chain for the same classification; creating a subclass just to change a data value; rules change often without wanting code changes; or the same lookup is duplicated in several places.

Access method: direct (data keys straight into the table, e.g. month 1–12) → indexed (large/sparse keyspace, few entries) → stair-step (entries valid for ranges, e.g. grade thresholds).

McCabe complexity

Count: start at 1, add 1 per if/while/for/and/or and per case branch.

A routine in the 10–20 range is acceptable only when all of: it's a flat dispatch (switch/case, no nesting within cases); each case is ≤3 lines (ideally a single call); cases are exhaustive and unlikely to grow unboundedly; and cognitive complexity is low. Inherent-complexity or "just a big if-else chain" do not qualify — extract instead.

Modern equivalents

The same flatten-the-structure principle applies beyond Code Complete's era: async/await replaces callback nesting, and exhaustiveness-checked pattern matching is the valid high-McCabe flat dispatch.