C# Irritation

[realJSOP]

I came from a heavy C++ background into C#, and things went a lot smoother for me when I leaped the metal hurdle of "C# ain't C++". I agree, C++ lets you do a lot of things that make sense, but c# simply isn't *that* similar to C++.

"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001

[Ennis Ray Lynch Jr]

I think you are fighting OO and trying to write old style c/c++. Just let go and do what MS calls OO and you will get it.

Need a C# Consultant? I'm available.
Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know. -- Ernest Hemingway

[Dan Neely]

Phil J Pearson wrote:

Having said that ... if I was writing the language I'd make seamlessly correcting human-language mismatches a part of the spec. [Shucks]

"Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Nagus Plain'English wgah'nagl fhtagn"

Today's lesson is brought to you by the word "niggardly". Remember kids, don't attribute to racism what can be explained by Scandinavian language roots. -- Robert Royall

[Stuart Dootson]

Ennis Ray Lynch, Jr. wrote:

I think you are fighting OO

You could well be right - I used to be an OO true believer, but I saw another way[^] and have strayed :-)

[Jim Crafton]

Steve_Harris wrote:

They still haven't produced a coordinate system where Y increases as you go up.

And they are probably not going to. Very few, if any desktop windowing systems use a left/bottom origin point. I'm pretty sure a big part of that is text layout, since text, for the most commonly used languages anyways (English, romance languages, slavic languages, etc), lays out left to right, top to bottom. The only desktop system I've seen doing this is NeXTStep/Cocoa, and even there you have the option of telling the framework you want the coordinates flipped for a specific view/control.

¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire! Real Mentats use only 100% pure, unfooled around with Sapho Juice(tm)! SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0 0 rows returned Save an Orange - Use the VCF! VCF Blog

[Shog9 0]

Oh yeah. Easily one of the more bone-headed things they did with C#. Until you remember that C# was designed for VB programmers, who are used to just making copies of everything they don't want modified... ;)

Citizen 20.1.01

'The question is,' said Humpty Dumpty, 'which is to be master - that's all.'

[Shog9 0]

Simon Stevens wrote:

Adding const wouldn't actually change anything. The only benefit it would give is a compiler warning if you tried to change the value. But you shouldn't be changing the value anyway if you want it to be readonly.

Scenario: Method returns reference to internal object. This object represents a fundamental type in the domain of this particular app; there are hundreds of thousands of unique instances and they're used all over the place. At one point in its lifetime, it was mutable - special loader classes pulled data into it from many disparate sources, checking and double-checking, correcting and re-correcting. Therefore, it has public mutator methods. But at this point, it is to be considered immutable. C++: method would return a const reference. Any naive caller attempting to modify it would trigger a compiler error. C#: method must return interface rather than direct object reference, or rely on callers to Do The Right Thing, or set some dodgy "done changing state" flag internal to the object itself and implement const checking at runtime.

Citizen 20.1.01

'The question is,' said Humpty Dumpty, 'which is to be master - that's all.'

[PIEBALDconsult]

My background is just plain C and I never used const there so I have no trouble understanding const and readonly in C#. Additionally, in the snippet you show, I wouldn't declare the local variable in the loop at all. I'd rework the entire thing to be more like:

private void PerformTests()
{
ActiveEvents actualEvent ;

do
{      
    switch ( actualEvent = WaitForEvent ( ActiveEvents.ShouldStart ) )
    {      
       ...
    }
}
while ( actualEvent != ActiveEvents.ShouldExit ) ;

return ;

}

[hairy_hats]

Why have one .NET library (Math) which works with radians and another (Drawing2D) which works with degrees?

[hairy_hats]

And Maths is spelt with an s.

[Al Beback]

Simon Stevens wrote:

Colour is spelt with a u.

Yeah, and don't forget whilst. :rolleyes: :)

My latest C# extension method:   public static bool In<T>(this T value, params T[] values)   {       return values.Any(v => v.Equals(value));   } Example:   bool valid = answer.In("Yes", "No", "Dunno");

[Al Beback]

Shog9 wrote:

C++: method would return a const reference. Any naive caller attempting to modify it would trigger a compiler error.

Yes, and that naive caller (who's also foolish and stubborn) soon discovers that he can cast away constness and get away with murder. :-)

Shog9 wrote:

C#: method must return interface rather than direct object reference

This is the way I would do it (which the above guy can also cast away if he wants).

My latest C# extension method:   public static bool In<T>(this T value, params T[] values)   {       return values.Any(v => v.Equals(value));   } Example:   bool valid = answer.In("Yes", "No", "Dunno");

[Joe Woodbury]

Simon Stevens wrote:

C# has totally different design goals.

I would phrase it that C# has totally different design constraints.

Anyone who thinks he has a better idea of what's good for people than people do is a swine. - P.J. O'Rourke

[Joe Woodbury]

Because in user interfaces, the upper left corner is the origin. When you resize a screen, for example, you typically want the origin to remain where it is and have the bottom of the window reduce or expand.

Anyone who thinks he has a better idea of what's good for people than people do is a swine. - P.J. O'Rourke

[Shog9 0]

Al Beback wrote:

Yes, and that naive caller (who's also foolish and stubborn) soon discovers that he can cast away constness and get away with murder.

Yeah, and i can still access anything i want to with Reflection in C#, or with direct memory access in C++. I can still write a COM method that does evil things with (in,out) parameters. So what? This isn't about security, it's about the ability to specify what's appropriate and have the compiler help you out if you forget what's what. You know. The same reason some of us use languages with explicit datatypes. When i want my language to act like Javascript, i use Javascript.

Al Beback wrote:

This is the way I would do it (which the above guy can also cast away if he wants).

You must work with evil, evil people... :~

Citizen 20.1.01

'The question is,' said Humpty Dumpty, 'which is to be master - that's all.'

[Dan Neely]

actually the convention is hardware derived. The electron beam in a CRT begins painting from the upper left.

Today's lesson is brought to you by the word "niggardly". Remember kids, don't attribute to racism what can be explained by Scandinavian language roots. -- Robert Royall

[VanityClaw]

Nah - This guys just whining.... Nothing better to do?

[peterchen]

10 out of 10 C++ programmers prefer unmanaged anger.

We are a big screwed up dysfunctional psychotic happy family - some more screwed up, others more happy, but everybody's psychotic joint venture definition of CP
blog: TDD - the Aha! | Linkify!| FoldWithUs! | sighist

[wout de zeeuw]

Yeah, the choice of words was an invitation for puns! :-D

Wout

[peterchen]

always happ to deliver :D

We are a big screwed up dysfunctional psychotic happy family - some more screwed up, others more happy, but everybody's psychotic joint venture definition of CP
blog: TDD - the Aha! | Linkify!| FoldWithUs! | sighist