Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Code Project
  1. Home
  2. Other Discussions
  3. The Weird and The Wonderful
  4. Aaaarg....use the namespace

Aaaarg....use the namespace

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved The Weird and The Wonderful
csharpc++javaphp
31 Posts 9 Posters 0 Views 1 Watching
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • P PIEBALDconsult

    Ah, so perhaps you were agreeing with me. I see now that my statement was unclear and I have added clarification.

    S Offline
    S Offline
    Sentenryu
    wrote on last edited by
    #15

    Yes yes, I really have bad time expressing this things on languages other than my own... (actually, even in my own language sometimes I've bad times trying to express my self... :( )

    I'm brazilian and english (well, human languages in general) aren't my best skill, so, sorry by my english. (if you want we can speak in C# or VB.Net =p)

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • P PIEBALDconsult

      Eddy Vluggen wrote:

      prefixing everything with "global::".

      I tried that, briefly.

      L Offline
      L Offline
      Lost User
      wrote on last edited by
      #16

      PIEBALDconsult wrote:

      I tried that, briefly.

      ..a good idea, if you are paid per line written. It should feel comparably to explicitly stating that a member is "private", and prefixing everything possible with "this".

      Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss:

      P 1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • S Sentenryu

        Personally, I always import, unless there is already something with the same name imported. But it's a matter of taste.

        I'm brazilian and english (well, human languages in general) aren't my best skill, so, sorry by my english. (if you want we can speak in C# or VB.Net =p)

        L Offline
        L Offline
        Lost User
        wrote on last edited by
        #17

        Sentenryu wrote:

        But it's a matter of taste.

        No, it's not. Bloating code is an offence. Three offences, you're out.

        Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss:

        B 1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • L Lost User

          PIEBALDconsult wrote:

          I tried that, briefly.

          ..a good idea, if you are paid per line written. It should feel comparably to explicitly stating that a member is "private", and prefixing everything possible with "this".

          Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss:

          P Offline
          P Offline
          PIEBALDconsult
          wrote on last edited by
          #18

          Eddy Vluggen wrote:

          explicitly stating that a member is "private",

          Which everyone should do. There should be no default access modifiers.

          Eddy Vluggen wrote:

          prefixing everything possible with "this".

          Which I also do. Just because. :cool:

          L 1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • P PIEBALDconsult

            Eddy Vluggen wrote:

            explicitly stating that a member is "private",

            Which everyone should do. There should be no default access modifiers.

            Eddy Vluggen wrote:

            prefixing everything possible with "this".

            Which I also do. Just because. :cool:

            L Offline
            L Offline
            Lost User
            wrote on last edited by
            #19

            PIEBALDconsult wrote:

            Which everyone should do. There should be no default access modifiers.

            Why?

            PIEBALDconsult wrote:

            Which I also do. Just because. :cool:

            The amount of symbols that you use to convey an idea would best be kept to a minimum.

            Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss:

            N 1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • L Lost User

              PIEBALDconsult wrote:

              Which everyone should do. There should be no default access modifiers.

              Why?

              PIEBALDconsult wrote:

              Which I also do. Just because. :cool:

              The amount of symbols that you use to convey an idea would best be kept to a minimum.

              Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss:

              N Offline
              N Offline
              Nagy Vilmos
              wrote on last edited by
              #20

              No, you prefix the member if a class with this to prevent any ambiguity. The method or property on it's own only implies where it is. If I have this code:

              class Thingy {
              private int majig = 27;

              void summit() {
                  if (majig > 42) {
                    // clever code
                  }
              }
              

              }

              And I copy the test to another method, all bad things could happen:

              void nuThang() {
                  // lots of code
                  int majig = 69;
              
                  // lots more code
                  // copied:
                  if (majig > 42) {
                    // clever code
                  }
              }
              

              oops.


              Panic, Chaos, Destruction. My work here is done. Drink. Get drunk. Fall over - P O'H OK, I will win to day or my name isn't Ethel Crudacre! - DD Ethel Crudacre I cannot live by bread alone. Bacon and ketchup are needed as well. - Trollslayer Have a bit more patience with newbies. Of course some of them act dumb - they're often *students*, for heaven's sake - Terry Pratchett

              L P 2 Replies Last reply
              0
              • N Nagy Vilmos

                No, you prefix the member if a class with this to prevent any ambiguity. The method or property on it's own only implies where it is. If I have this code:

                class Thingy {
                private int majig = 27;

                void summit() {
                    if (majig > 42) {
                      // clever code
                    }
                }
                

                }

                And I copy the test to another method, all bad things could happen:

                void nuThang() {
                    // lots of code
                    int majig = 69;
                
                    // lots more code
                    // copied:
                    if (majig > 42) {
                      // clever code
                    }
                }
                

                oops.


                Panic, Chaos, Destruction. My work here is done. Drink. Get drunk. Fall over - P O'H OK, I will win to day or my name isn't Ethel Crudacre! - DD Ethel Crudacre I cannot live by bread alone. Bacon and ketchup are needed as well. - Trollslayer Have a bit more patience with newbies. Of course some of them act dumb - they're often *students*, for heaven's sake - Terry Pratchett

                L Offline
                L Offline
                Lost User
                wrote on last edited by
                #21

                Copy/paste is often an invitation not to check what you just pasted. Your example might be a nice example on why we introduced the DRY principle, but being this abstract, one can't be sure. But no, I'd not be bloating my code for the sake of "easy copies". If it's that re-usable, I'll take the time to make it a snippet. --edit;

                Nagy Vilmos wrote:

                No, you prefix the member if a class with this to prevent any ambiguity

                ..the same kind of ambiguity that you have if you don't use the full name against a type, including it's namespace. Do you have global variables that clash with the names of the property/method that you're calling from the current object that you need to specify explicitly that you need the property/method from "this" object?

                Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss:

                1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • N Nagy Vilmos

                  No, you prefix the member if a class with this to prevent any ambiguity. The method or property on it's own only implies where it is. If I have this code:

                  class Thingy {
                  private int majig = 27;

                  void summit() {
                      if (majig > 42) {
                        // clever code
                      }
                  }
                  

                  }

                  And I copy the test to another method, all bad things could happen:

                  void nuThang() {
                      // lots of code
                      int majig = 69;
                  
                      // lots more code
                      // copied:
                      if (majig > 42) {
                        // clever code
                      }
                  }
                  

                  oops.


                  Panic, Chaos, Destruction. My work here is done. Drink. Get drunk. Fall over - P O'H OK, I will win to day or my name isn't Ethel Crudacre! - DD Ethel Crudacre I cannot live by bread alone. Bacon and ketchup are needed as well. - Trollslayer Have a bit more patience with newbies. Of course some of them act dumb - they're often *students*, for heaven's sake - Terry Pratchett

                  P Offline
                  P Offline
                  PIEBALDconsult
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #22

                  Nagy Vilmos wrote:

                  you prefix the member if a class with this to prevent any ambiguity

                  Correct.

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • S Sentenryu

                    I don't see the shame on this, this guy just like to write long names :|

                    I'm brazilian and english (well, human languages in general) aren't my best skill, so, sorry by my english. (if you want we can speak in C# or VB.Net =p)

                    T Offline
                    T Offline
                    thatraja
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #23

                    Sentenryu wrote:

                    I don't see the shame on this, this guy just like to write long names :|

                    :doh: Huh? I don't, read my message again. I don't want the repetitions so I just mentioned the namespace at the top & replaced things.

                    thatraja

                    FREE Code Conversion VB6 ASP VB.NET C# ASP.NET C++ JAVA PHP DELPHI ColdFusion
                    HTML Marquee & its alternatives

                    Nobody remains a virgin, Life screws everyone :sigh:

                    S 1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • P PIEBALDconsult

                      I disagree, it's just code, the compiler doesn't care* and it's better to give the next developer too much information rather than too little. But could they have all shared one static instance? How often are these methods called? Are there threading issues? How big do the StringBuilders become? Can you estimate how big? If large, then pre-allocating enough memory or re-using existing instances can eliminate a lot of needless re-allocation. * However, I suspect that when you use the using directive** the compiler must have to spend some additional time looking them up. ** Qualification added for clarification.

                      T Offline
                      T Offline
                      thatraja
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #24

                      There I mentioned StringBuilder is just an example. I found many similar things like below.

                      System.Diagnostics.Trace.Write
                      System.Diagnostics.Trace.WriteLine
                      System.Drawing.Color
                      System.Configuration.Configuration
                      System.IO.StreamWriter
                      System.IO.StreamReader
                      System.IO.FileInfo
                      System.IO.FileStream
                      System.IO.StringReader
                      System.IO.StringWriter
                      System.IO.TextReader
                      System.IO.TextWriter
                      System.Xml.XmlDocument
                      etc.,
                      ....
                      ...
                      ..
                      .

                      Why so much repetitions? After that some more 100s of replacements done. Namespace at top.

                      thatraja

                      FREE Code Conversion VB6 ASP VB.NET C# ASP.NET C++ JAVA PHP DELPHI ColdFusion
                      HTML Marquee & its alternatives

                      Nobody remains a virgin, Life screws everyone :sigh:

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • T thatraja

                        Sentenryu wrote:

                        I don't see the shame on this, this guy just like to write long names :|

                        :doh: Huh? I don't, read my message again. I don't want the repetitions so I just mentioned the namespace at the top & replaced things.

                        thatraja

                        FREE Code Conversion VB6 ASP VB.NET C# ASP.NET C++ JAVA PHP DELPHI ColdFusion
                        HTML Marquee & its alternatives

                        Nobody remains a virgin, Life screws everyone :sigh:

                        S Offline
                        S Offline
                        Sentenryu
                        wrote on last edited by
                        #25

                        I was talking about the original programmer, is that you?

                        I'm brazilian and english (well, human languages in general) aren't my best skill, so, sorry by my english. (if you want we can speak in C# or VB.Net =p)

                        T 1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • L Lost User

                          Sentenryu wrote:

                          But it's a matter of taste.

                          No, it's not. Bloating code is an offence. Three offences, you're out.

                          Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss:

                          B Offline
                          B Offline
                          BillW33
                          wrote on last edited by
                          #26

                          But, some folk like to bloat their code. ;) ;) I agree, there is no good reason to do this, but it is not as bad as wacky, buggy code.

                          Just because the code works, it doesn't mean that it is good code.

                          L 1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          • B BillW33

                            But, some folk like to bloat their code. ;) ;) I agree, there is no good reason to do this, but it is not as bad as wacky, buggy code.

                            Just because the code works, it doesn't mean that it is good code.

                            L Offline
                            L Offline
                            Lost User
                            wrote on last edited by
                            #27

                            CIDev wrote:

                            I agree, there is no good reason to do this, but it is not as bad as wacky, buggy code.

                            To quote one of the arguments why it is;

                            CIDev wrote:

                            Just because the code works, it doesn't mean that it is good code.

                            And that's easy to explain; the more symbols you need to convey an idea, the more chances that there's an error in the communication. The more symbols, the more fluff, the more bugs.

                            Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss:

                            1 Reply Last reply
                            0
                            • T thatraja

                              I found 100+ StringBuilders in a module(see below).

                              function string function1()
                              {
                              System.Text.StringBuilder sb1 = new System.Text.StringBuilder();
                              ....
                              ...
                              }
                              function void method1()
                              {
                              System.Text.StringBuilder sb2 = new System.Text.StringBuilder();
                              ....
                              ...
                              }
                              function string function3()
                              {
                              System.Text.StringBuilder sb3 = new System.Text.StringBuilder();
                              ....
                              ...
                              }
                              ....
                              ...

                              X| Then I have Included the namespace at top of the module.

                              using System.Text;

                              And replaced System.Text.StringBuilder with StringBuilder

                              thatraja

                              FREE Code Conversion VB6 ASP VB.NET C# ASP.NET C++ JAVA PHP DELPHI ColdFusion
                              HTML Marquee & its alternatives

                              Nobody remains a virgin, Life screws everyone :sigh:

                              Sander RosselS Offline
                              Sander RosselS Offline
                              Sander Rossel
                              wrote on last edited by
                              #28

                              Not that it's a good excuse, but it makes copy/pasting the code easier :) If you'd import the System.Text Namespace and copy/pasted the entire thing to another file you'd get an error for every StringBuilder. StringBuilder is a common class that should be known to all programmers, but for some of the more 'obscure' classes I prefer to use the entire namespace. Something like: SomeCompany.ThirdPartyTool.Library.PartINeed.SubPart.TheActualClass. At least now everyone who reads the code knows where this TheActualClass comes from, even if they didn't know the third party component. What I find even more annoying than having System.Text.StringBuilder 100+ times in your code is having lots of imports/using statements at the top of every code file. Especially when half of them aren't used. In C# you can right-click and remove unused imports. VB (unfortunately) doesn't have this option (and please save me the C# vs. VB discussion). I wouldn't call this a code horror, but in this case an import of System.Text does seem logical. The real horror might be that you use 100+ StringBuilders instead of re-use one... But I'll leave that to you :)

                              It's an OO world.

                              public class Naerling : Lazy<Person>{
                              public void DoWork(){ throw new NotImplementedException(); }
                              }

                              E 1 Reply Last reply
                              0
                              • S Sentenryu

                                I was talking about the original programmer, is that you?

                                I'm brazilian and english (well, human languages in general) aren't my best skill, so, sorry by my english. (if you want we can speak in C# or VB.Net =p)

                                T Offline
                                T Offline
                                thatraja
                                wrote on last edited by
                                #29

                                Sentenryu wrote:

                                I was talking about the original programmer, is that you?

                                No

                                thatraja

                                FREE Code Conversion VB6 ASP VB.NET C# ASP.NET C++ JAVA PHP DELPHI ColdFusion
                                HTML Marquee & its alternatives

                                Nobody remains a virgin, Life screws everyone :sigh:

                                1 Reply Last reply
                                0
                                • Sander RosselS Sander Rossel

                                  Not that it's a good excuse, but it makes copy/pasting the code easier :) If you'd import the System.Text Namespace and copy/pasted the entire thing to another file you'd get an error for every StringBuilder. StringBuilder is a common class that should be known to all programmers, but for some of the more 'obscure' classes I prefer to use the entire namespace. Something like: SomeCompany.ThirdPartyTool.Library.PartINeed.SubPart.TheActualClass. At least now everyone who reads the code knows where this TheActualClass comes from, even if they didn't know the third party component. What I find even more annoying than having System.Text.StringBuilder 100+ times in your code is having lots of imports/using statements at the top of every code file. Especially when half of them aren't used. In C# you can right-click and remove unused imports. VB (unfortunately) doesn't have this option (and please save me the C# vs. VB discussion). I wouldn't call this a code horror, but in this case an import of System.Text does seem logical. The real horror might be that you use 100+ StringBuilders instead of re-use one... But I'll leave that to you :)

                                  It's an OO world.

                                  public class Naerling : Lazy<Person>{
                                  public void DoWork(){ throw new NotImplementedException(); }
                                  }

                                  E Offline
                                  E Offline
                                  Edward Giles
                                  wrote on last edited by
                                  #30

                                  "VB (unfortunately) doesn't have this option (and please save me the C# vs. VB discussion)." It does have that option, at least in the version I've used (VB2010)

                                  Sander RosselS 1 Reply Last reply
                                  0
                                  • E Edward Giles

                                    "VB (unfortunately) doesn't have this option (and please save me the C# vs. VB discussion)." It does have that option, at least in the version I've used (VB2010)

                                    Sander RosselS Offline
                                    Sander RosselS Offline
                                    Sander Rossel
                                    wrote on last edited by
                                    #31

                                    Really? I was never able to find it. Just right click and...?

                                    It's an OO world.

                                    public class Naerling : Lazy<Person>{
                                    public void DoWork(){ throw new NotImplementedException(); }
                                    }

                                    1 Reply Last reply
                                    0
                                    Reply
                                    • Reply as topic
                                    Log in to reply
                                    • Oldest to Newest
                                    • Newest to Oldest
                                    • Most Votes


                                    • Login

                                    • Don't have an account? Register

                                    • Login or register to search.
                                    • First post
                                      Last post
                                    0
                                    • Categories
                                    • Recent
                                    • Tags
                                    • Popular
                                    • World
                                    • Users
                                    • Groups