Strictly Short Circuit
-
Names changed to protect the innocent... I'm working with some VB.net projects and I decided to turn on Option Strict. It threw an error for this line:
If someProp Is Nothing OrElse String.IsNullOrEmpty(someProp.Value OrElse someProp.Value = "0") Then
This is what was intended:
If someProp Is Nothing OrElse String.IsNullOrEmpty(someProp.Value) OrElse someProp.Value = "0" Then
:-D for option explicit! :(( for the fact that I have several projects to go and I'm working in the order of best code to worst code.
Option strict FTW! Option strict all the way! Option strict is the first thing I turn on when anyone hands me a VB.Net project. I'll say it a million times: I would rather get a compile time error than a runtime error. Option strict won't flag every possible runtime error, but it will flag most of the boneheaded ones.
-
Slight disagreement. The real horror is that the developer has to specify, "Yes, please use short-circuit boolean logic" by using OrElse instead of that being the default behavior.
You mean like it is in every other language? The way it should be?
-
Names changed to protect the innocent... I'm working with some VB.net projects and I decided to turn on Option Strict. It threw an error for this line:
If someProp Is Nothing OrElse String.IsNullOrEmpty(someProp.Value OrElse someProp.Value = "0") Then
This is what was intended:
If someProp Is Nothing OrElse String.IsNullOrEmpty(someProp.Value) OrElse someProp.Value = "0" Then
:-D for option explicit! :(( for the fact that I have several projects to go and I'm working in the order of best code to worst code.
I can develop in more than 10 language (actually, I don't know exactly how much languages I now, I always forgot some) and I have no preference for the best language. Almost all the time I use C#, but I use others as needed if the moment needs and it pays my bills. But, I really don't like VB at all. I know VB since VB 5.0 (or 3.0, I don't remember, the year was 98) and these syntax flaws are really annoying. The VB (also VB .net) rounding is also terribly, all languages that I know truncate integer division and VB round it. The backwards compatibility of VB .net with VB 6 projects made VB .net a horrible language. I'm really experienced with VB (and VB .net) and it's a pain to correct legacy code in this language, so good luck!
-
Naerling wrote:
Our company has a product where turning Option Strict On results in probably 1000's of errors
Then you need to start fixing now. Enable it on file level and fix the files one by one. If it's not the highest priority your company has problems.
Light moves faster than sound. That is why some people appear bright, until you hear them speak. List of common misconceptions
Jörgen Andersson wrote:
If it's not the highest priority your company has problems.
If we make it our highest priority we'll be fixing software that 'works' as far as the customer is concerned. We won't be able to make new software anytime soon. We won't have any revenues for the coming months, just fixes that might not fix all they were supposed to fix. And lots of angry customers. No, if we made it our top priority THEN we have a problem... I might not be happy with it, my boss might not be happy with it, but that's just the way it is. Luckily, any new software we built is built with option strict on :)
It's an OO world.
public class Naerling : Lazy<Person>{
public void DoWork(){ throw new NotImplementedException(); }
} -
Slight disagreement. The real horror is that the developer has to specify, "Yes, please use short-circuit boolean logic" by using OrElse instead of that being the default behavior.
And the IIf function doesn't even have a short-circuit version! If you're used to writing code like this in C#:
int count = list == null ? 0 : list.Count;
and you try to translate to VB:
dim count as integer = iif(list is nothing, 0, list.Count)
you will wind up with a NullReferenceException when list is null/nothing!
-
Computers should be used for what they are good at: systematic consistency checks. Because this is where they can help preventing bugs early. Static analysis. If I were God, I would make the Strict mode compulsory. And enhance the programming languages to help computers help us. For instance by introducing dimensional analysis on the data.
Dim Meters as Unit
Dim Side As Integer in Meters, Area As Integer in Meters^2, Count(0 To 5) As IntegerArea = 3 * Side 'Error: Option Strict On disallows implicit conversion from Meters to Meters^2
Count(Side) = Count(Side) + 1 'Error: Option Strict On disallows using dimensional expressions as indexes -
And the IIf function doesn't even have a short-circuit version! If you're used to writing code like this in C#:
int count = list == null ? 0 : list.Count;
and you try to translate to VB:
dim count as integer = iif(list is nothing, 0, list.Count)
you will wind up with a NullReferenceException when list is null/nothing!
Actually, since VB 2008, that's no longer true. The If Operator (without the extra I) The 3 parameter form act like the C# ternary operator
? :, while the 2 parameter form would be the C# coalesce??. But yes, TRWTF is VB. -
True object-oriented programming allows it because they are all objects. It doesn't care.
God I really...REALLY hope that you're just trolling.
-
Actually, since VB 2008, that's no longer true. The If Operator (without the extra I) The 3 parameter form act like the C# ternary operator
? :, while the 2 parameter form would be the C# coalesce??. But yes, TRWTF is VB. -
Names changed to protect the innocent... I'm working with some VB.net projects and I decided to turn on Option Strict. It threw an error for this line:
If someProp Is Nothing OrElse String.IsNullOrEmpty(someProp.Value OrElse someProp.Value = "0") Then
This is what was intended:
If someProp Is Nothing OrElse String.IsNullOrEmpty(someProp.Value) OrElse someProp.Value = "0" Then
:-D for option explicit! :(( for the fact that I have several projects to go and I'm working in the order of best code to worst code.
You Remind me my Old company. Joining them I started developing with VB6. In my Project I did the entire project keeping Option Explicit on. Then I gave that entire project to my Senior. Then he complained: Hey I cannot program, its making error. ?????????????????? what ????
I know I am coward since the day I know that fortune favors the brave
-
Naerling wrote:
Our company has a product where turning Option Strict On results in probably 1000's of errors
Then you need to start fixing now. Enable it on file level and fix the files one by one. If it's not the highest priority your company has problems.
Light moves faster than sound. That is why some people appear bright, until you hear them speak. List of common misconceptions
Jörgen Andersson wrote:
Naerling wrote:
Our company has a product where turning Option Strict On results in probably 1000's of errors
Then you need to start fixring now. ...snip... If it's not the highest priority your company has problems.
FTFY
