And the prize for the most stupid error messages goes to....
-
String.Empty isn't a constant: it's a
static readonlyvalue. Reference Source[^] As such, it's value could depend on the initialization sequence in theory. Anyway, "" is a lot clearer - and it's a constant! :laugh:Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay... AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
-
String.Empty isn't a constant: it's a
static readonlyvalue. Reference Source[^] As such, it's value could depend on the initialization sequence in theory. Anyway, "" is a lot clearer - and it's a constant! :laugh:Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay... AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
So "" != String.Empty ? :laugh:
Now is it bad enough that you let somebody else kick your butts without you trying to do it to each other? Now if we're all talking about the same man, and I think we are... it appears he's got a rather growing collection of our bikes.
-
You should give your variables meaningful names.
-
If it is set to readonly so can never change, doesn't that make it constant?
Maybe we should have a modifier "SetOnceReadMany", to describe something that is not a "constant" in the sense of a literal, but will always return the same value when read. At least in a given run it returns the same value - not necessarily under varying conditions, such as moving your code to another operating system. The value is not modifiable (hence 'constant'), but depends on the OS (or some similar external condition.)
-
So "" != String.Empty ? :laugh:
Now is it bad enough that you let somebody else kick your butts without you trying to do it to each other? Now if we're all talking about the same man, and I think we are... it appears he's got a rather growing collection of our bikes.
Nope, it's much better! :laugh:
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay... AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
-
Maybe we should have a modifier "SetOnceReadMany", to describe something that is not a "constant" in the sense of a literal, but will always return the same value when read. At least in a given run it returns the same value - not necessarily under varying conditions, such as moving your code to another operating system. The value is not modifiable (hence 'constant'), but depends on the OS (or some similar external condition.)
-
Nope, it's much better! :laugh:
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay... AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
-
F-ES Sitecore wrote:
You should give your variables meaningful names.
I'm sure it was just an example but how do you know it's not meaningful anyway?
Sin tack the any key okay
It was only a joke :)
-
It was only a joke :)
-
Does not help. It still needs to store the string somewhere, even if the string is "" and once it does that, (1) what's stored at that location can be externally modified after compilation and/or during execution.
Sin tack the any key okay
Sure, even if the value is burnt into a ROM, you can unsolder that ROM and put another one in place. So you can set Environment.NewLine to "xyzzy", if that satisfies you one way or the other. But that will neither change the newline convention in Windows, *nix or OSX. I've seen people, in classic K&R C, set up #define to give FALSE the value 1 and TRUE the value 0. And I've heard of people programming in Forth to set the value of 3 to 17 - in that language, the literal 3 is a symbol that just happens to initially have the value of e.g. the count of x-es in the string "xxx", but it can be redefined som something else. Aa a code obfuscation mechanism, it is of course great. I think that when you work in a given language, your task should be solved in that language, using the abstractions and concepts in that language. If it says that a value is constant, it IS constant for that problem solution. Just like you can go behind the compiler's back and change a contant value, you can also open an .exe or .dll file before it is run and change a "greater than" conditional jump to a "greater that or equal to" conditional jump. So the loop termination, while appearing to be constant at the source code level, is actually varying depending on which modification are made to the executable code file. If you start digging a huge hole in the ground underneath your house, your house will fall into it. You asked for it, you got it.
-
Wait, what? You know you can't get high on diesel. Or are we still excited with that extra 40% per gallon by switching fuels?
Sin tack the any key okay
Lopatir wrote:
You know you can't get high on diesel.
Well, technically.. [Continental Diesel](http://www.continentaldiesel.com/typo3/index.php?id=2&L=1) :laugh:
Now is it bad enough that you let somebody else kick your butts without you trying to do it to each other? Now if we're all talking about the same man, and I think we are... it appears he's got a rather growing collection of our bikes.
-
Microsoft C#. I set a function parameter (string myVar = string.Empty) and got: Default parameter value for 'myVar' must be a compile-time constant I fail to see how anything could be more constant than string.Empty.... :laugh:
I raise you a SQL error.. [Error Message] TITLE: SQL Server Setup failure. ------------------------------ SQL Server Setup has encountered the following error: The given key was not present in the dictionary.. For help, click: ------------------------------ BUTTONS: OK ------------------------------ [/Error Message] In the end, it was not happy about an IP address in the cluster.
Common sense is admitting there is cause and effect and that you can exert some control over what you understand.
-
Nope, it's much better! :laugh:
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay... AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
What!!! I've been extremely anal about using string.Empty instead of "" and you tell me it's the lesser option.
Never underestimate the power of human stupidity RAH
-
You should give your variables meaningful names.
-
So "" != String.Empty ? :laugh:
Now is it bad enough that you let somebody else kick your butts without you trying to do it to each other? Now if we're all talking about the same man, and I think we are... it appears he's got a rather growing collection of our bikes.
Run this code
if (ReferenceEquals(string.Empty, ""))
{
Console.WriteLine("\"\" is the same as String.Empty");
}String.Empty and "" are likely to reference the same memory location so they are effectively the same (There's a name for this combining of string resources but I forget what it is). The problem with using String.Empty as a default value for a function parameter is that it's not a COMPILE time constant. The value stored in String.Empty is a reference to the string "" stored in memory and that reference doesn't get set until the program starts and the string "" gets loaded into memory. Because how can you have a reference to a memory location before the program has started? So basically this error message is 100% accurate. It wanted a compile time constant but was given a runtime constant and it said "That's not good enough, mate".
-
Run this code
if (ReferenceEquals(string.Empty, ""))
{
Console.WriteLine("\"\" is the same as String.Empty");
}String.Empty and "" are likely to reference the same memory location so they are effectively the same (There's a name for this combining of string resources but I forget what it is). The problem with using String.Empty as a default value for a function parameter is that it's not a COMPILE time constant. The value stored in String.Empty is a reference to the string "" stored in memory and that reference doesn't get set until the program starts and the string "" gets loaded into memory. Because how can you have a reference to a memory location before the program has started? So basically this error message is 100% accurate. It wanted a compile time constant but was given a runtime constant and it said "That's not good enough, mate".
I wasn't too serious :laugh: However, I think it would make sense if Microsoft actually allow parameters to have a default value of string.Empty instead of "". It's always been pushed as being a bad practice to have 'magic strings' in code.
Now is it bad enough that you let somebody else kick your butts without you trying to do it to each other? Now if we're all talking about the same man, and I think we are... it appears he's got a rather growing collection of our bikes.
-
Microsoft C#. I set a function parameter (string myVar = string.Empty) and got: Default parameter value for 'myVar' must be a compile-time constant I fail to see how anything could be more constant than string.Empty.... :laugh:
Many of you may not be old enough to remember this one. Dumbest error message I ever saw was from early Microsoft DOS: Keyboard not found. Press Enter to continue.
-
Microsoft C#. I set a function parameter (string myVar = string.Empty) and got: Default parameter value for 'myVar' must be a compile-time constant I fail to see how anything could be more constant than string.Empty.... :laugh:
