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. The Lounge
  3. PQOTD

PQOTD

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved The Lounge
csharpquestion
59 Posts 31 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.
  • G Gary Wheeler

    I thought that was the case - your response just seemed rather unNish-like :laugh:.

    Software Zen: delete this;

    N Offline
    N Offline
    Nish Nishant
    wrote on last edited by
    #50

    Heh :-)

    Regards, Nish


    Blog: voidnish.wordpress.com Latest article: C++ 11 features in Visual C++ 2013 Preview

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • B BobJanova

      It will run either ProcessFlyouts, or ProcessCarrierAnimations, or neither, and the variable will tell you if it successfully ran either. I would imagine you either want && or |.

      J Offline
      J Offline
      James Curran
      wrote on last edited by
      #51

      >> It will run either ProcessFlyouts, or ProcessCarrierAnimations, or neither, Um... Not even close. It will, unquestionably, run ProcessFlyouts. It may also run ProcessCarrierAnimations.

      Truth, James

      B 1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • M Marc Clifton

        Programming Quiz of the day. I just wrote this code (C#), which did something very unexpected. What was it that it unexpectedly did?

        		bool more = ProcessFlyouts();
        		more = more || ProcessCarrierAnimations();
        

        How would you change it to "do the right thing?" Marc

        J Offline
        J Offline
        James Curran
        wrote on last edited by
        #52

        The "early out" semantics of the logical operators (|| and &&) are the same for C#, C++, Java, and C, and have been well-specified since the First Edition of K&R C. How could the result possibly be unexpected?

        Truth, James

        1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • J James Curran

          >> It will run either ProcessFlyouts, or ProcessCarrierAnimations, or neither, Um... Not even close. It will, unquestionably, run ProcessFlyouts. It may also run ProcessCarrierAnimations.

          Truth, James

          B Offline
          B Offline
          BobJanova
          wrote on last edited by
          #53

          That is pretty close to what I said, although that was admittedly technically wrong. (I understand how || works but apparently failed in the challenge of writing English!) "Not even close" would be "it returns banana or grapefruit depending on the wolf".

          1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • Kornfeld Eliyahu PeterK Kornfeld Eliyahu Peter

            I do not like that change from C/C++...I mean the | and || changes... X|

            I'm not questioning your powers of observation; I'm merely remarking upon the paradox of asking a masked man who he is. (V)

            J Offline
            J Offline
            James Curran
            wrote on last edited by
            #54

            >> I do not like that change from C/C++...I mean the | and || changes... Exactly, what changes are those? I've used C# for 10 ten years, and C/C++ for the ten years before that, and have noticed no differences in the handling of logical operators.

            Truth, James

            1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • M Marc Clifton

              Programming Quiz of the day. I just wrote this code (C#), which did something very unexpected. What was it that it unexpectedly did?

              		bool more = ProcessFlyouts();
              		more = more || ProcessCarrierAnimations();
              

              How would you change it to "do the right thing?" Marc

              R Offline
              R Offline
              RichardInToronto
              wrote on last edited by
              #55

              My bet is that ProcessCarrierAnimations isn't executed if ProcessFlyouts returns true. If ProcessCarrierAnimations should still be called, you could remove one of the "vertical bars", changing the "short-circuit" OR into a regular logical-OR. Richard

              F 1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • M Marc Clifton

                You should be able to glean what the programmer intends to happen from the code. :) Marc

                P Offline
                P Offline
                patbob
                wrote on last edited by
                #56

                Without further information, it is obvious that the programmer intended ProcessCarrierAnimations() to only be called if ProcessFlyouts() returns false. I'm with OriginalGriff on this..

                ProcessCarrierAnimations() || more;

                This is clearly the better way to express intent that using a bitwise OR. Unless there are tests like this all over the code done with bitwise ORs, using one here requires the next programmer to notice you did something atypical here in a fairly subtle way, which means its a maintenance hazard, which in my book is part of the definition of poor coding.

                We can program with only 1's, but if all you've got are zeros, you've got nothing.

                1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • R RichardInToronto

                  My bet is that ProcessCarrierAnimations isn't executed if ProcessFlyouts returns true. If ProcessCarrierAnimations should still be called, you could remove one of the "vertical bars", changing the "short-circuit" OR into a regular logical-OR. Richard

                  F Offline
                  F Offline
                  Fernando Takeshi Sato
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #57

                  hhhmmm...I never thought of bitwise operators as being the 'regular' ones; quite the contrary, actually.

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • M Marc Clifton

                    Programming Quiz of the day. I just wrote this code (C#), which did something very unexpected. What was it that it unexpectedly did?

                    		bool more = ProcessFlyouts();
                    		more = more || ProcessCarrierAnimations();
                    

                    How would you change it to "do the right thing?" Marc

                    M Offline
                    M Offline
                    Member_5893260
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #58

                    It failed to run ProcessCarrierAnimations because more was already true, and thus the evaluator short-circuited. You want something like this:

                    bool more=ProcessFlyouts();
                    bool more2=ProcessCarrierAnimations();
                    more = more || more2;

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • M Marc Clifton

                      Programming Quiz of the day. I just wrote this code (C#), which did something very unexpected. What was it that it unexpectedly did?

                      		bool more = ProcessFlyouts();
                      		more = more || ProcessCarrierAnimations();
                      

                      How would you change it to "do the right thing?" Marc

                      U Offline
                      U Offline
                      User 10244914
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #59

                      if(!ProcessFlyouts()) { ProcessCarrierAnimations() }

                      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