AARRGGHHHH!!!!!
-
I use (our team uses) var, where applicable. Nothing wrong with it, unless you are using notepad to edit your code. :)
-
I use (our team uses) var, where applicable. Nothing wrong with it, unless you are using notepad to edit your code. :)
-
harold aptroot wrote:
Are you one of Those People who use var instead of int?
no. I did say "where applicable". We use var on list returns and some lamda/linq stuff, but not everywhere. Edit: I have never run into an issue with "var". Visual Studio lets me know what the type is, if I need to know it.
-
harold aptroot wrote:
Are you one of Those People who use var instead of int?
no. I did say "where applicable". We use var on list returns and some lamda/linq stuff, but not everywhere. Edit: I have never run into an issue with "var". Visual Studio lets me know what the type is, if I need to know it.
-
To obfuscate variable type ;P
-
Ok good.
Slacker007 wrote:
"where applicable"
Well that's the thing. There's a school of thought that it is applicable any time it is allowed.
harold aptroot wrote:
There's a school of thought that it is applicable any time it is allowed.
I use ReSharper a lot, and it will ask you everytime it can to use implicit type declaration. So, I can see why some devs out there may think that it is good for everything. However, I have debugged code files that have had "var" all over the place, and it has not been an issue. If for some reason, I cannot tell the type, then hovering over "var" will tell you.
-
harold aptroot wrote:
There's a school of thought that it is applicable any time it is allowed.
I use ReSharper a lot, and it will ask you everytime it can to use implicit type declaration. So, I can see why some devs out there may think that it is good for everything. However, I have debugged code files that have had "var" all over the place, and it has not been an issue. If for some reason, I cannot tell the type, then hovering over "var" will tell you.
Try doing a code review in Crucible where someone's abused var and then see how you feel about that. ;)
-
I absolutely despise when people say "oh, I'm using this because it reduces the amount of code I have to type". F**** me. If you don't like typing, why are you a programmer? I need a punching bag in my home-office. Marc
Imperative to Functional Programming Succinctly Contributors Wanted for Higher Order Programming Project!
Marc Clifton wrote:
If you don't like typing, why are you a programmer?
Dunno, money? But seriously, it's the most boring part.
-
I am. Why the hell not? It's more aesthetically pleasing and in most cases it does not reduce readability (for me, for you - don't care). I haven't use it much in C# before C++11 assigned new meaning to
auto. Then I started replacing crap like thisstd::unordered_map<std::string, boring_class>::const_iteratorwithautoand then moved the habit to C#. -
harold aptroot wrote:
Are you one of Those People who use var instead of int?
no. I did say "where applicable". We use var on list returns and some lamda/linq stuff, but not everywhere. Edit: I have never run into an issue with "var". Visual Studio lets me know what the type is, if I need to know it.
Slacker007 wrote:
Visual Studio lets me know what the type is, if I need to know it.
Irrelevent. Try reading newbie code posted in QA.
-
I absolutely despise when people say "oh, I'm using this because it reduces the amount of code I have to type". F**** me. If you don't like typing, why are you a programmer? I need a punching bag in my home-office. Marc
Imperative to Functional Programming Succinctly Contributors Wanted for Higher Order Programming Project!
Marc Clifton wrote:
If you don't like typing, why are you a programmer?
Voice control is always an option. I know devs who'd happily use it very loudly when inputting code that they (erroneously) believe to be genius, and only use the keyboard to input their dirty hacks. I'd say that there's a possible connection between those guys and your guys.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
-
I am. Why the hell not? It's more aesthetically pleasing and in most cases it does not reduce readability (for me, for you - don't care). I haven't use it much in C# before C++11 assigned new meaning to
auto. Then I started replacing crap like thisstd::unordered_map<std::string, boring_class>::const_iteratorwithautoand then moved the habit to C#.Thank you. Exactly.
-
I absolutely despise when people say "oh, I'm using this because it reduces the amount of code I have to type". F**** me. If you don't like typing, why are you a programmer? I need a punching bag in my home-office. Marc
Imperative to Functional Programming Succinctly Contributors Wanted for Higher Order Programming Project!
Thank you, I needed a good chuckle this morning. I do enjoy your rants, they align with my thinking rather nicely.
Never underestimate the power of human stupidity RAH
-
I absolutely despise when people say "oh, I'm using this because it reduces the amount of code I have to type". F**** me. If you don't like typing, why are you a programmer? I need a punching bag in my home-office. Marc
Imperative to Functional Programming Succinctly Contributors Wanted for Higher Order Programming Project!
Marc Clifton wrote:
oh, I'm using this because it reduces the amount of code I have to type
Have you used LINQ? Do you know it reduces the amount of.....Oops.
Mobile Apps - Sound Meter | Color Analyzer | SMBC | Football Doodles
-
Same thing I see with Linq/Lambdas ; it's still just the
Cult of Fewer Keystrokes. X|PIEBALDconsult wrote:
Same thing I see with Linq/Lambdas ; it's still just the
Cult of Fewer Keystrokes. X|I really like linq/lambdas. They unify the way many various things are accessed, and in my opinion make the code more readable. Just my opinion. Your mileage may vary.
Once you lose your pride the rest is easy. In the end, only three things matter: how much you loved, how gently you lived, and how gracefully you let go of things not meant for you. – Buddha Simply Elegant Designs JimmyRopes Designs
-
PIEBALDconsult wrote:
Same thing I see with Linq/Lambdas ; it's still just the
Cult of Fewer Keystrokes. X|I really like linq/lambdas. They unify the way many various things are accessed, and in my opinion make the code more readable. Just my opinion. Your mileage may vary.
Once you lose your pride the rest is easy. In the end, only three things matter: how much you loved, how gently you lived, and how gracefully you let go of things not meant for you. – Buddha Simply Elegant Designs JimmyRopes Designs
JimmyRopes wrote:
They unify the way many various things are accessed
To the lowest common, and therefore the least efficient, method possible. And it's unreadable.
-
I absolutely despise when people say "oh, I'm using this because it reduces the amount of code I have to type". F**** me. If you don't like typing, why are you a programmer? I need a punching bag in my home-office. Marc
Imperative to Functional Programming Succinctly Contributors Wanted for Higher Order Programming Project!
I always try and reduce the amount of code I type. I live by Intellisense and code snippets, or ReSharper's Live Templates, but, I am not scared of typing out long and meaningful member names to start with. That is, I loath contractions and acronyms in code.
No object is so beautiful that, under certain conditions, it will not look ugly. - Oscar Wilde
-
I absolutely despise when people say "oh, I'm using this because it reduces the amount of code I have to type". F**** me. If you don't like typing, why are you a programmer? I need a punching bag in my home-office. Marc
Imperative to Functional Programming Succinctly Contributors Wanted for Higher Order Programming Project!
You sound like me, sometimes; you must be getting old, too. I once set out to master C++, and I spent many years trying to do so. But MS decided that everything had to run on an event-driven model, and get filtered through MFC, and have most of the code written by a robot and hidden from the programmer who was trying to learn the language. After 10 years, I gave up trying; coincidentally, MS gave up MFC about the same time. I come from a background in which, if there's no OS to work with, write one. If there's no off-the-shelf compiler, write one. If there's no language appropriate to the task, create one, and the tools to compile and link the modules. We're dinosaurs, Marc. The kids want all the hard parts done for them, while they spend their time making pretty, politically correct GUIs to make the Great Unwashed feel like they know how to operate a computer. We all know better, but if we tell them what we really think about their silly ideas and idiotic notions about what computers can and should do for us, we'll probably get fired. Roll with it, and keep praying for that big Lottery win; that's my retirement plan, and I'm sticking to it! :-D
Will Rogers never met me.
-
harold aptroot wrote:
There's a school of thought that it is applicable any time it is allowed.
I use ReSharper a lot, and it will ask you everytime it can to use implicit type declaration. So, I can see why some devs out there may think that it is good for everything. However, I have debugged code files that have had "var" all over the place, and it has not been an issue. If for some reason, I cannot tell the type, then hovering over "var" will tell you.
No. I will not rely on some IDE to tell me what my code means. Often enough the IDE is too busy showing me hysterical error messages or the parser got lost a little further up in the code and simply is not able to provide any useful information anymore. Second, especially when I have to work with complex baseclasses, I tend to use some good oldschool printouts of those baseclasses as reference. I tried using intellisense on a printout, but the result always was a classic 'Funny, no response!'. Third. I don't hover, not even when flying a helicopter.
The language is JavaScript. that of Mordor, which I will not utter here
This is Javascript. If you put big wheels and a racing stripe on a golf cart, it's still a fucking golf cart.
"I don't know, extraterrestrial?" "You mean like from space?" "No, from Canada." If software development were a circus, we would all be the clowns. -
I always try and reduce the amount of code I type. I live by Intellisense and code snippets, or ReSharper's Live Templates, but, I am not scared of typing out long and meaningful member names to start with. That is, I loath contractions and acronyms in code.
No object is so beautiful that, under certain conditions, it will not look ugly. - Oscar Wilde
Let's make the list a little longer: - Use 'this' wherever you can. It makes things much more readable when every second word is 'this'. - Use magic numbers, but not as a numeric type. Write only stringly typed code and use all kinds of error prone conversions where you can.
// I'm not good at this :-)
foreach(var MiscVal in LMAA)
{
var xdbrnf = this.DoReMiFaSo(MiscVal, 1);
if((xdbrnf == "0" || xdbrnf == "-1" || xdbrnf == "4") && int.parse(xdbrnf) < 42)
{
this.SlfDestrct();
}
}The language is JavaScript. that of Mordor, which I will not utter here
This is Javascript. If you put big wheels and a racing stripe on a golf cart, it's still a fucking golf cart.
"I don't know, extraterrestrial?" "You mean like from space?" "No, from Canada." If software development were a circus, we would all be the clowns.
