Focused on clarity...
-
Everything in the project is this explicit. This is from a class that simply wraps a boolean value. Oh, the wonders of template code!
public string BoolString
{
get
{
string boolString;
try
{
if (this.m_value == true)
boolString = "1";
else
boolString = "0";
return boolString;
}
catch (Exception e)
{
throw e;
}
finally
{
}
}
}Because return m_value ? "1" : "0"; is too tricky.
-
@djork said:
Everything in the project is this explicit. This is from a class that simply wraps a boolean value. Oh, the wonders of template code!
public string BoolString
{
get
{
string boolString;
try
{
if (this.m_value == true)
boolString = "1";
else
boolString = "0";
return boolString;
}
catch (Exception e)
{
throw e;
}
finally
{
}
}
}Because return m_value ? "1" : "0"; is too tricky.
Yeah... but then do a "throw e"...
Looks for me like someone rigidly followed the spec without having the sightliest, tiniest clue WHY those rules are there.
-
@djork said:
Because return m_value ? "1" : "0"; is too tricky.
Is it 0 or is it 1? I can't tell. What are these question marks, quotes, zeroes, ones, semi-colons, ARE YOU WRITING IN GIBBERISH??? Logic overload dude!
-
@dlikhten said:
@djork said:
Because return m_value ? "1" : "0"; is too tricky.
Is it 0 or is it 1? I can't tell. What are these question marks, quotes, zeroes, ones, semi-colons, ARE YOU WRITING IN GIBBERISH??? Logic overload dude!
That was, of course, meant ironically.
-
@djork said:
Because return m_value ? "1" : "0"; is too tricky.
If you ever wanted to make the UI display "true" and "false" instead of 1 and 0 for all booleans, yes that would be a pain in the arse. you could take your chances with find and replace, but be careful.
-
@vt_mruhlin said:
@djork said:
Because return m_value ? "1" : "0"; is too tricky.
If you ever wanted to make the UI display "true" and "false" instead of 1 and 0 for all booleans, yes that would be a pain in the arse. you could take your chances with find and replace, but be careful.
I don't get it. I'm advocating using "?:" for the body of the method, not in place of calling this method.
-
I especially like that empty finally{} clause.
-
What, 6 replies and no "FILE_NOT_FOUND" references?
-
-
@PSWorx said:
@dlikhten said:
@djork said:
Because return m_value ? "1" : "0"; is too tricky.
Is it 0 or is it 1? I can't tell. What are these question marks, quotes, zeroes, ones, semi-colons, ARE YOU WRITING IN GIBBERISH??? Logic overload dude!
That was, of course, meant ironically.
We sincerely hope.