Its always good to check for nothing.....
-
And as soon as you remove the obviously-meaningless loop, you'll learn two things: 1) objectivesLst is actually an IEnumerable that, when enumerated, writes pieces of its contents to ten different parts of the application for later use. Suddenly, you have NullReferenceExceptions coming out of your ears... 2) Accessing the EndDate property sets a global variable that's later used to prevent the application from reformatting your hard drive. Unfortunately, you'll learn these too late to save yourself, and will instead begin an epic journey to find whoever wrote the code and beat him to a pulp :)
Proud to have finally moved to the A-Ark. Which one are you in?
Author of the Guardians Saga (Sci-Fi/Fantasy novels) -
And as soon as you remove the obviously-meaningless loop, you'll learn two things: 1) objectivesLst is actually an IEnumerable that, when enumerated, writes pieces of its contents to ten different parts of the application for later use. Suddenly, you have NullReferenceExceptions coming out of your ears... 2) Accessing the EndDate property sets a global variable that's later used to prevent the application from reformatting your hard drive. Unfortunately, you'll learn these too late to save yourself, and will instead begin an epic journey to find whoever wrote the code and beat him to a pulp :)
Proud to have finally moved to the A-Ark. Which one are you in?
Author of the Guardians Saga (Sci-Fi/Fantasy novels)Alas, that reminds me of some code I work with now wherein a User object has a Save method to persist it to the database -- with the result that when a user "logs in" to the app the last login date is set on the object and then we call Save. OK. Buuuut the Save also goes out and hits Active Directory to see whether or not other things have changed. :sigh: So every once in a while, we have to iterate all the User records from the database, make them User objects, and call Save. :doh: Add to that that it used to work just fine and took a few minutes to process 4000 or so Users. But then the main developer decided to become clever and use Reflection to populate the User objects, and now it takes a half hour. :mad:
You'll never get very far if all you do is follow instructions.
-
Alas, that reminds me of some code I work with now wherein a User object has a Save method to persist it to the database -- with the result that when a user "logs in" to the app the last login date is set on the object and then we call Save. OK. Buuuut the Save also goes out and hits Active Directory to see whether or not other things have changed. :sigh: So every once in a while, we have to iterate all the User records from the database, make them User objects, and call Save. :doh: Add to that that it used to work just fine and took a few minutes to process 4000 or so Users. But then the main developer decided to become clever and use Reflection to populate the User objects, and now it takes a half hour. :mad:
You'll never get very far if all you do is follow instructions.
PIEBALDconsult wrote:
But then the main developer decided to become clever and use Reflection to populate the User objects, and now it takes a half hour.
- Reflect once to get the property list 2) Use LINQ Expressions to compile mutators in memory 3) ??? 4) Profit!
Proud to have finally moved to the A-Ark. Which one are you in?
Author of the Guardians Saga (Sci-Fi/Fantasy novels) -
PIEBALDconsult wrote:
But then the main developer decided to become clever and use Reflection to populate the User objects, and now it takes a half hour.
- Reflect once to get the property list 2) Use LINQ Expressions to compile mutators in memory 3) ??? 4) Profit!
Proud to have finally moved to the A-Ark. Which one are you in?
Author of the Guardians Saga (Sci-Fi/Fantasy novels)- Yes, if I had known what he was doing I would have suggested it, but I didn't know until after he left. He probbaly wouldn't have taken my advice though because "it works". It's that he removed good code and replaced it with bad code that really gets me.
You'll never get very far if all you do is follow instructions.
-
PIEBALDconsult wrote:
But then the main developer decided to become clever and use Reflection to populate the User objects, and now it takes a half hour.
- Reflect once to get the property list 2) Use LINQ Expressions to compile mutators in memory 3) ??? 4) Profit!
Proud to have finally moved to the A-Ark. Which one are you in?
Author of the Guardians Saga (Sci-Fi/Fantasy novels) -
foreach (var thisObjective in objectivesLst)
{
if (thisObjective.EndDate != null)
{}
else
{}
}And this beauty lies inside one of the wonderful projects i came across. I have not removed any code from the above snippet. This is part of the code which i found in completed project. This developer should really be awarded... :laugh:
"When you don't know what you're doing it's best to do it quickly"- SoMad
No, no, no. You got it all wrong. The EndDate property does actually important part of work here and the if{..}else{..} is there to prevent that pesky optimizer from removing useful code :D But if by any chance it really is that way, you better start to look for a good gun and a good lawyer...
-- "My software never has bugs. It just develops random features."
-
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
it'd be three steps
Gimme three steps. Gimme three steps, mister...
You'll never get very far if all you do is follow instructions.
-
foreach (var thisObjective in objectivesLst)
{
if (thisObjective.EndDate != null)
{}
else
{}
}And this beauty lies inside one of the wonderful projects i came across. I have not removed any code from the above snippet. This is part of the code which i found in completed project. This developer should really be awarded... :laugh:
"When you don't know what you're doing it's best to do it quickly"- SoMad
-
foreach (var thisObjective in objectivesLst)
{
if (thisObjective.EndDate != null)
{}
else
{}
}And this beauty lies inside one of the wonderful projects i came across. I have not removed any code from the above snippet. This is part of the code which i found in completed project. This developer should really be awarded... :laugh:
"When you don't know what you're doing it's best to do it quickly"- SoMad
Did the guy face some problems with lazy loading? The optimizer might remove an empty foreach, hence he accesses a property of every item. Why not create a ForceLoad function in the list, and call it? - Well, obfuscating the intent of some code is such a great idea.
-
PIEBALDconsult wrote:
But then the main developer decided to become clever and use Reflection to populate the User objects, and now it takes a half hour.
- Reflect once to get the property list 2) Use LINQ Expressions to compile mutators in memory 3) ??? 4) Profit!
Proud to have finally moved to the A-Ark. Which one are you in?
Author of the Guardians Saga (Sci-Fi/Fantasy novels)Don't even have to be that clever, just caching the result of reflection calls in a Dictionary<string, PropertyInfo> takes away all the slowness. I've had to do that a few times over the years. Linq Expressions lets you write arguably more elegant code to do it, but might be a bit hard to get an incompetent developer to understand ;)
-
Don't even have to be that clever, just caching the result of reflection calls in a Dictionary<string, PropertyInfo> takes away all the slowness. I've had to do that a few times over the years. Linq Expressions lets you write arguably more elegant code to do it, but might be a bit hard to get an incompetent developer to understand ;)
That makes it faster, but you're still adding boxing/unboxing, since PropertyInfo.Invoke() isn't strongly-typed. Not significant in small doses, but call it a few thousand times with primitive types and you'll notice a difference. My current implementation feeds the columns in a custom-made data grid, and that can seriously add up.
Proud to have finally moved to the A-Ark. Which one are you in?
Author of the Guardians Saga (Sci-Fi/Fantasy novels) -
That makes it faster, but you're still adding boxing/unboxing, since PropertyInfo.Invoke() isn't strongly-typed. Not significant in small doses, but call it a few thousand times with primitive types and you'll notice a difference. My current implementation feeds the columns in a custom-made data grid, and that can seriously add up.
Proud to have finally moved to the A-Ark. Which one are you in?
Author of the Guardians Saga (Sci-Fi/Fantasy novels)That's true but I've done something similar (model-view binding into a data grid where the columns are based on properties of the data objects) and it was easily fast enough once I cached the PropertyInfos. I'm not saying you are wrong (you're not, your solution is better), just that you don't need to go to that level to get most of the benefit.
-
foreach (var thisObjective in objectivesLst)
{
if (thisObjective.EndDate != null)
{}
else
{}
}And this beauty lies inside one of the wonderful projects i came across. I have not removed any code from the above snippet. This is part of the code which i found in completed project. This developer should really be awarded... :laugh:
"When you don't know what you're doing it's best to do it quickly"- SoMad
It's invisible NSA code
If your actions inspire others to dream more, learn more, do more and become more, you are a leader.-John Q. Adams
You must accept one of two basic premises: Either we are alone in the universe, or we are not alone in the universe. And either way, the implications are staggering.-Wernher von Braun
Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former.-Albert Einstein -
FUD* rules! You don't want to take it out, because it MAY do something. What if in it's nothingness it does a something? Hahaha - :D Besides, who cares? No one pays me to remove code. Do they? :D I'm trolling for people who think I'm serious. Are you one of them? *FUD - Fear, Uncertainty, Doubt
Actually it does something: it reads Enddate, which may cause an access violation if it was called on an invalid object. I'm not sure what language that is from, so maybe it isn't possible to have an invalid object in the list, but then the entire list could be invalid, no?
GOTOs are a bit like wire coat hangers: they tend to breed in the darkness, such that where there once were few, eventually there are many, and the program's architecture collapses beneath them. (Fran Poretto)
-
Indeed, get rid of the
varand replace it with the actual type.You'll never get very far if all you do is follow instructions.
People were paid to make my compiler do that. And it does.