AARRGGHHHH!!!!!

[Paul Benson]

Interesting discussion. I found var a bit difficult to cope with at first as it does hide the actual type. Fortunately many IDEs will, as has been pointed out elsewhere, give you the type if you hover over the 'var'. This, however, doesn't help when dealing with printed/quoted code snippets or when working in an environment that doesn't reveal the type. So, my definition of 'appropriate' is where the type is obvious (usually because the assignment includes the type as part of a 'new' or a typecast of some kind) or because the type is so complicated that it obfuscates itself (e.g. nested generics with multiple parameters). In the latter case I either rely on VS for an explanation or, where possible, simplify the type by creating a new wrapper class/struct with XML help to explain what the class is about. The basic rule is "Think about other people when writing your code." Always ask yourself 'Can this be understood without having to look through reams of code or relying on an IDE to find variable/type definitions?' If not can it be simplified or explained?" If all else fails use a comment to explain (and thereby starts another argument :sigh: ).

[Lost User]

Really? Writing (perhaps) a lable, an opcode and typically 0 - 2 operands actually looks quite spartan to me. Also, you have the single most important abstraction at your disposal: Structuring your code in subroutines or functions. The biggest bonus: There is little room for religious wars over styles or language features.

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.

[Lost User]

Well ok, if it's some shitty long name it makes sense. If it's int or similar, it does not.

[OriginalGriff]

Slacker007 wrote:

f for some reason, I cannot tell the type, then hovering over "var" will tell you.

Yes, it will - but that wastes time and breaks the "flow" when reading the code. An explicit declaration is always clearer - particularly when it's to hold a method return value:

var myVar = GetSomething();

Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...

[Jorgen Andersson]

It would obviously depend on what you're doing, but let's just say that I wouldn't enjoy writing a website from scratch in assembly.

Wrong is evil and must be defeated. - Jeff Ello

[Lost User]

Who enjoys writing websites in the first place?

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.

[Jorgen Andersson]

It's a job. :sigh:

Wrong is evil and must be defeated. - Jeff Ello

[Slacker007]

PIEBALDconsult wrote:

And it's unreadable.

When done correctly, it is very readable and strongly encouraged in all of our software teams. However, I have seen it done poorly, which validates your comment, IMO.

[Slacker007]

Interesting view points. ;)

[Sentenryu]

CDP1802 wrote:

or the parser got lost a little further up in the code and simply is not able to provide any useful information anymore.

after saying that you really think you are in position to say that var is a problem? you just said you write code that the machine that will compile and run it can't understand.

[Lost User]

No. When the parser is a little upset and confused, the code will not compile. Nor will it be able to provide me with some of the information I may need to correct this. In this situation I prefer not having to rely on intellisense.

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.

[Lost User]

Actually I have nothing against hovering with a helicopter. It's just because I gave a friend the nickname 'Hoverfly' because he keeps practicing hovering and did not want to carefully start flying around. Last weekend he did and crashed his helicopter and has been repairing since then. Now I can't just say that hovering is ok, or he will never try again.

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.

[GuyThiebaut]

V. wrote:

Knock yourself one out!

Not sure if you intended to, or did so by mistake, but that phrase has a very particular meaning. Maybe type the phrase into google images and click on the I'm feeling lucky button :~

“That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.”

― Christopher Hitchens

[Fabio Franco]

Couldn't agree more with you. I would also like to add that even if you have Visual Studio it interrupts reading and interpreting the code. Making it harder to understand for someone that is reading the code for the first time. I blame ReSharper for the fever of using var everywhere. That's the argument of many: "Oh, but Resharper says to use var everywhere". I wish I knew who at ReSharper dev team decided it was a good thing.

To alcohol! The cause of, and solution to, all of life's problems - Homer Simpson ---- Our heads are round so our thoughts can change direction - Francis Picabia

[Fabio Franco]

Hardly the rule and only applicable for complex names. Now, people use it on method returns and everywhere. I happen to be in a position that I have to read a lot of other people's code and it's a pain to read them when var is used everywhere. On generic types it's even more disrupting.

To alcohol! The cause of, and solution to, all of life's problems - Homer Simpson ---- Our heads are round so our thoughts can change direction - Francis Picabia

[Fabio Franco]

How often do you have to declare stuff like in C++ std::unordered_map::const_iterator? It's hardly the rule. If you're declaring

Tuple, KeyValuePair>

or something like that, maybe it makes sense. But more often than not, it doesnt.

To alcohol! The cause of, and solution to, all of life's problems - Homer Simpson ---- Our heads are round so our thoughts can change direction - Francis Picabia

[Fabio Franco]

F*** me too. And Resharper that says lazy mode var is a good thing. :mad:

To alcohol! The cause of, and solution to, all of life's problems - Homer Simpson ---- Our heads are round so our thoughts can change direction - Francis Picabia

[V 0]

I didn't know :doh:

V.
(MQOTD rules and previous solutions)

[Gerald Gardner]

If I liked typing I'd have been a typist. If I could write code without typing at all I would. BTW: I almost exclusively use "var" and see little wrong with it. I guess I'm an "implied typist"! :laugh: But I also use bigLongVariableNames, because that's where the real value of all those extra characters comes in.

[JimmyRopes]

PIEBALDconsult wrote:

To the lowest common, and therefore the least efficient, method possible.

Is this just speculation or can you cite data to back up your psition?

PIEBALDconsult wrote:

And it's unreadable.

I, personally, find this a lot more readable than the alternative.

XDocument xml = XDocument.Load(Environment.GetEnvironmentVariable("SystemDrive") + @"\manifest.xml");

            var oledbconn = from el in xml.Root.Elements("webservice")
                            where el.Attribute("name").Value == ServiceName
                            select el.Element("OleDbConnection").Value;
            OleDbConnectionString = oledbconn.FirstOrDefault();

You, of course, are entitled to your opinion.

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