Ideas to avoid switch statements when choice of components

tabs.js

const notImplemented = { view: () => m("div", "Not implemented") };
const components = {
  "WaveForm": sineBody,
  "WebsocketSource" wssBody
};
// ...
return m(".card-body", m(components[vnode.attrs.type] || notImplemented, vnode.attrs));

// or 
m('.card-body',
  m(components[vnode.attrs.type] || 'div', vnode.attrs, 'Not implemented')
)
// or using FP
const get = (k,o) => [o[k]].filter( x => x != null)
// or 
const get = (k,o) => o[k] != null ? [ o[k] ] : []
// and
const maybe = (a, f) => Ma => Ma.map( a => f(a)).concat(a).pop()
// or
const maybe = (a,f) => Ma => Ma.length > 0 ? f(Ma[0]) : a

m('.card-body', 
   [ get( 
      vnode.attrs.type
     , { Waveform: sineBody
     ,  WebsocketSource: wssBody
     }
   )]
   .map( maybe('Not implemented', a => m( a, vnode.attrs) ) )
   .pop()
)
// or
[ get( 
   vnode.attrs.type
   , { Waveform: sineBody
   ,  WebsocketSource: wssBody
   }
)]
.map( maybe('Not implemented', a => m( a, vnode.attrs) ) )
.map( a => m('.card-body', a )
     
// this function a => m(a, vnode.attrs) and this function m('.card-body', a) will come up over and over.
// So let's define some combinators for dealing with these patterns.
const children = (tag, attrs) => children => m(tag, attrs, children)
const tag = (attrs,children) => tag => m(tag, attrs,children)
// For completion we could also have attrs but anyway....
[ get( 
   vnode.attrs.type
   , { Waveform: sineBody
   ,  WebsocketSource: wssBody
   }
)]
.map( maybe('Not implemented', tag( vnode.attrs, [])) )
.map( children( '.card-body', {})  )

Credit @JAForbes and @foxdonut