A disturbing new trend?

PIEBALDconsult

When I first learned BASIC in the '80s, the only structure available was the array, so we had to use that and build up more complex structures, but that's just not necessary with C#, OOP, and Collections. So I am saddened to these posts from the last few days: "Int32[] playerNumbers, String[] playerLastName, Int32[] playerPoints" -- Arrays how to delete multiple entries[^] "Int32[] playerNumbers, ref Int32 playerCount, String[] playerLastName, Int32[] playerPoints" -- Cannot convert type int[] to int[^] "Int32[] playerNumbers, ref Int32 playerCount, String[] playerLastName, Int32[] playerPoints" -- delete method not deleting[^] "Array carPark[10][2];" -- What Is Wrong With The Code And Why Doesnt It Run When I Try To Run It In C#[^] Those first two are the same member, the third probably is as well. The fourth is at least using a two-dimensional array, but he obviously copied it from somewhere and has no idea what it is. Oh, sweet Bob, they keep coming... "public string[][] Select(string query)" -- How to return array or list 2 dimensional from SQL Query[^] WTF!? "ProcessDelete(Int32[] playerNumbers, ref Int32 playerCount, String[] playerLastName, Int32[] playerPoints )"

ledtech3

Looking at that last one there are several things wrong with it. If this is a school project then perhaps it is the teacher that needs pulled out of the 80's

PIEBALDconsult

ledtech3 wrote:

If this is a school project

That's very likely.

ledtech3 wrote:

teacher that needs pulled out of the 80's

Indeed. I know I'm old-school, but this is a ridiculous level of archeology.

Marc Clifton

PIEBALDconsult wrote:

When I first learned BASIC in the '80s, the only structure available was the array,

Then C introduced the struct. Then C++ decided struct should have methods, and called it a class and added all sorts of other artifacts (inheritance, polymorphism, and encapsulation.) Then came along relational databases, and we were introduced in C# to a newfangled way of working with structures, the DataTable, DataView and DataSet, but those caused impedence mismatches so a new artifact was born, the ORM. Then the jar-heads decided to inflict themselves on the process because this was all too complicated and created JSON, a string "structure" that took us back to the BASIC 80's of untyped data and structure encoded in the string itself. Simultaneously, the "kids" (who were not even a glimmer in the eyes of their parents in the 80's) decided that relational databases were bad and gave us NoSQL, which, guess what, uses JSON, is document oriented and requires client-side callbacks to "join" data across documents. And this is called progress. Marc

Imperative to Functional Programming Succinctly Higher Order Programming

PIEBALDconsult

Marc Clifton wrote:

Then C introduced the struct.

Exactly, even Pascal has records (?), variant records as well. Of course in Perl you'd have to use a hash ( X| ), but at least it's something.

PhilLenoir

To say nothing of COBOL. No please, say nothing of COBOL!

Life is like a s**t sandwich; the more bread you have, the less s**t you eat.

PIEBALDconsult

I didn't. I didn't even think it. Until now, thank you very little.

PhilLenoir

:doh:

Life is like a s**t sandwich; the more bread you have, the less s**t you eat.

PhilLenoir

I'd heard of COBOL.NET, but since I last touched COBOL almost 30 years ago I though I'd do a quick search. I found this:

program-id. Program1 as "ConsoleHelloWorld.Program1".
data division.
working-storage section.
procedure division.
display "Hello World"
goback.
end program Program1.

X|

Life is like a s**t sandwich; the more bread you have, the less s**t you eat.

BillWoodruff

The fourth example uses a jagged array, an array of arrays, not quite the same thing as a 2-d array, and under-the-hood in .NET: "If you write some simple code using jagged and multidimensional arrays and then inspect the compiled assembly with an IL disassembler you will see that the storage and retrieval from jagged (or single dimensional) arrays are simple IL instructions while the same operations for multidimensional arrays are method invocations which are always slower" [^].

« I am putting myself to the fullest possible use which is all, I think, that any conscious entity can ever hope to do » HAL (Heuristically programmed ALgorithmic computer) in "2001, A Space Odyssey"

PIEBALDconsult

BillWoodruff wrote:

not quite the same thing

Pfft, details. :rolleyes:

Andy Brummer

I once worked with a developer that couldn't figure out why this:

for i=0 to a.length
response.write(a[0])
end

output the same value over and over again. He had only worked with ADODB recordsets.

Curvature of the Mind now with 3D

Roger Wright

PIEBALDconsult wrote:

When I first learned BASIC in the '80s, the only structure available was the array,

When I first learned BASIC in the '70s, the only arrays we had were 1 dimensional, 20 DATA 12, 22, 15, 'X' . . . 120 READ A, B, C, $D 130 GOTO 9999 . . . 9999 LPRINT A, B, C, $D 10000 END

Will Rogers never met me.

PIEBALDconsult

Oh, then having two was like twice as many. The BASIC I learned even had matrix operations built in!

Roger Wright

:-D :-D :-D My HP-67 calculator was, at the time, far more advanced than the version of BASIC available then.

Will Rogers never met me.

PIEBALDconsult

Roger Wright wrote:

HP-67

1867? :-D

Garth J Lancaster

COBOL's a pleasure compared to RPG !!! (IBM AS/400 for example)

Marakai

This entire thread brought a tear to my eye! Here I was thinking I'm the only grizzled fossil among a million "please, sirs, to send me the codes" or "can you do my programming homework for me?" and find that I am not alone! There are others whose first programming ventures were indeed programmable *calculators*? (TI-57 in my case) Mayhaps who thought that BASIC was a dumbing down and that Real Programmers used Assembler - when they were lazy and didn't just want to hack in 6502 machine code? *sniff* Vale atque ave, amici, vale atque ave!

Sander Rossel

So is the trend that teachers can't teach or that students can't learn? :rolleyes:

It's an OO world.

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

My blog[^]

Mark_Wallace

Ah, the good old days... I was early enough not to taught that the string is a data type, but that it's an array (which it still is, but no-one bothers to try to get that into their heads any more), and I've twice seen people reinventing the string by creating an array of characters that can be truncated, searched through, etc. And if I had a penny for every vacant stare I've seen when linked lists were mentioned... * * I could probably buy a Mars bar, but I'd rather let everyone's imagination exaggerate it for me

I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!