Code Reviews
-
I'm happy with
if (parameter == null) return;
and so on, but anything more complex than "return" or "throw" I put in brackets over three lines:
if (parameter == null)
{
...
}The only time I will omit the brackets is for a very short instruction on the same line as it's test.
"I have no idea what I did, but I'm taking full credit for it." - ThisOldTony "Common sense is so rare these days, it should be classified as a super power" - Random T-shirt AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
-
I just had a line of my code bounced for 'incorrect' syntax. It was a simple if/then - e.g.
if {condition} then {do something}
Which I had coded, as above, on a single line. The Code Reviewer said it should be on 3 lines. Both syntaxes are allowed in the language I am coding in, so I checked the Coding Standards document - and there's no mention of a preferred if/then syntax. Also, looking at the code-base, both syntaxes are used throughout. My view is: if they can't be bothered to document something as a standard, I, as a developer, am free to choose the syntax I prefer. I stood my ground, (and won out), not because I didn't want to spend 2 minutes changing the code, but because I value properly documented standards. What do you think guys?
-
I do brackets because, sooner or later, I'll be adding something else in there.
We won't sit down. We won't shut up. We won't go quietly away. YouTube, and My Mu[sic], Films and Windows Programs, etc. and FB
-
:thumbsup:
If you can keep your head while those about you are losing theirs, perhaps you don't understand the situation.
-
I just had a line of my code bounced for 'incorrect' syntax. It was a simple if/then - e.g.
if {condition} then {do something}
Which I had coded, as above, on a single line. The Code Reviewer said it should be on 3 lines. Both syntaxes are allowed in the language I am coding in, so I checked the Coding Standards document - and there's no mention of a preferred if/then syntax. Also, looking at the code-base, both syntaxes are used throughout. My view is: if they can't be bothered to document something as a standard, I, as a developer, am free to choose the syntax I prefer. I stood my ground, (and won out), not because I didn't want to spend 2 minutes changing the code, but because I value properly documented standards. What do you think guys?
Quote:
I stood my ground, (and won out), not because I didn't want to spend 2 minutes changing the code, but because I value properly documented standards.
Personally, I would have spent the 2 minutes changing the code (actually I wouldn't have done it that way but that's a different argument) .. .. AND a further 2 minutes updating the standards (or at least 2 minutes making life h3ll for the owner of those standards until they updated them :laugh: )
-
I'm happy with
if (parameter == null) return;
and so on, but anything more complex than "return" or "throw" I put in brackets over three lines:
if (parameter == null)
{
...
}The only time I will omit the brackets is for a very short instruction on the same line as it's test.
"I have no idea what I did, but I'm taking full credit for it." - ThisOldTony "Common sense is so rare these days, it should be classified as a super power" - Random T-shirt AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
Firstly, I'm coding in a very old language. Here's the exact line of code. Hopefully you can translate to a 'proper' language.
IF ERROR.MSG = "" THEN ERROR.MSG = "Error ":ERROR.CODE
It was a catch-all I inserted, (without being asked), to ensure that an error message would always be returned, even when it was an unknown error code. Yes, it's a single "=" for both conditions and assignments. And I was made to change it to upper-case. FFS! What they wanted, was:
IF ERROR.MSG = "" THEN
ERROR.MSG = "Error ":ERROR.CODE
ENDBut, the point that I was trying to make was: not that my way is right, but: if they want it doing a particular way, it should be documented - particular as the code-base contains a, pretty much, 50:50 split of both syntaxes.
-
I just had a line of my code bounced for 'incorrect' syntax. It was a simple if/then - e.g.
if {condition} then {do something}
Which I had coded, as above, on a single line. The Code Reviewer said it should be on 3 lines. Both syntaxes are allowed in the language I am coding in, so I checked the Coding Standards document - and there's no mention of a preferred if/then syntax. Also, looking at the code-base, both syntaxes are used throughout. My view is: if they can't be bothered to document something as a standard, I, as a developer, am free to choose the syntax I prefer. I stood my ground, (and won out), not because I didn't want to spend 2 minutes changing the code, but because I value properly documented standards. What do you think guys?
Since both formats are used within the code base the person who bounced it was just wrong. Code reviews should be about functionality not form. (I would have done it the 4 line way personally but no way would I have rejected the review on style.)
if (condition)
{
action
}But then, I'm old.
-
Since both formats are used within the code base the person who bounced it was just wrong. Code reviews should be about functionality not form. (I would have done it the 4 line way personally but no way would I have rejected the review on style.)
if (condition)
{
action
}But then, I'm old.
MarkTJohnson wrote:
But then, I'm old.
Me too! Which is probably why I get landed with working with archaic languages. :(
MarkTJohnson wrote:
Since both formats are used within the code base the person who bounced it was just wrong. Code reviews should be about functionality not form.
Yep. If this had been about something not working, (or if it was important enough to be documented as a standard), I would have changed it in a jif!
-
-
I just had a line of my code bounced for 'incorrect' syntax. It was a simple if/then - e.g.
if {condition} then {do something}
Which I had coded, as above, on a single line. The Code Reviewer said it should be on 3 lines. Both syntaxes are allowed in the language I am coding in, so I checked the Coding Standards document - and there's no mention of a preferred if/then syntax. Also, looking at the code-base, both syntaxes are used throughout. My view is: if they can't be bothered to document something as a standard, I, as a developer, am free to choose the syntax I prefer. I stood my ground, (and won out), not because I didn't want to spend 2 minutes changing the code, but because I value properly documented standards. What do you think guys?
Absent a team style document, definitely stand your ground. And certainly ignore weenies who try to quote from other teams' style documents. "But Microsoft says.." "We don't work for Microsoft, you weenie!" I'm a whitespace supremicist as most of you know, so I nearly always use as much vertical space as I deem reasonable. There are times, though, when I would use a series of one-liners. Usually if the tests and actions are very similar -- to show how they are similar.
if ( TestX ) { DoX() } ;
if ( TestY ) { DoY() } ;
if ( TestZ ) { DoX() } ;
...I feel that in this situation, this style leads to more readable/understandable code and that copy/paste errors like above may be more easily spotted. Does the language you're using not allow:
{do something} if {condition}
VAX BASIC V3.9-000
Ready
10 LET X = 42
20 PRINT "yes" IF X = 42
runnhyes
Ready:laugh:
-
I'm happy with
if (parameter == null) return;
and so on, but anything more complex than "return" or "throw" I put in brackets over three lines:
if (parameter == null)
{
...
}The only time I will omit the brackets is for a very short instruction on the same line as it's test.
"I have no idea what I did, but I'm taking full credit for it." - ThisOldTony "Common sense is so rare these days, it should be classified as a super power" - Random T-shirt AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
You do it all wrong! The correct syntax is:
if (parameter == null)
{
return;
}
else
{
}Reason: always add an else to an if, even if it's empty, because otherwise a future nested if could accidentally add an else at the wrong nesting level! ;P
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)
-
You do it all wrong! The correct syntax is:
if (parameter == null)
{
return;
}
else
{
}Reason: always add an else to an if, even if it's empty, because otherwise a future nested if could accidentally add an else at the wrong nesting level! ;P
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)
Take thy code to The Weird and The Wonderful[^] where it belongs! :laugh:
"I have no idea what I did, but I'm taking full credit for it." - ThisOldTony "Common sense is so rare these days, it should be classified as a super power" - Random T-shirt AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
-
I just had a line of my code bounced for 'incorrect' syntax. It was a simple if/then - e.g.
if {condition} then {do something}
Which I had coded, as above, on a single line. The Code Reviewer said it should be on 3 lines. Both syntaxes are allowed in the language I am coding in, so I checked the Coding Standards document - and there's no mention of a preferred if/then syntax. Also, looking at the code-base, both syntaxes are used throughout. My view is: if they can't be bothered to document something as a standard, I, as a developer, am free to choose the syntax I prefer. I stood my ground, (and won out), not because I didn't want to spend 2 minutes changing the code, but because I value properly documented standards. What do you think guys?
I think you may have won the battle, but lost the larger point of it all. What you accomplished was to make yourself difficult to deal with. I don't think that's what you intended.
The difficult we do right away... ...the impossible takes slightly longer.
-
I just had a line of my code bounced for 'incorrect' syntax. It was a simple if/then - e.g.
if {condition} then {do something}
Which I had coded, as above, on a single line. The Code Reviewer said it should be on 3 lines. Both syntaxes are allowed in the language I am coding in, so I checked the Coding Standards document - and there's no mention of a preferred if/then syntax. Also, looking at the code-base, both syntaxes are used throughout. My view is: if they can't be bothered to document something as a standard, I, as a developer, am free to choose the syntax I prefer. I stood my ground, (and won out), not because I didn't want to spend 2 minutes changing the code, but because I value properly documented standards. What do you think guys?
It's if (...), not if {...} I'll consider a single line if, if it is simple; and at the top of a method. Otherwise no. e.g. if ( parm1 == null ) { return; } And brackets around code: always. Even one-liners.
It was only in wine that he laid down no limit for himself, but he did not allow himself to be confused by it. ― Confucian Analects: Rules of Confucius about his food
-
Firstly, I'm coding in a very old language. Here's the exact line of code. Hopefully you can translate to a 'proper' language.
IF ERROR.MSG = "" THEN ERROR.MSG = "Error ":ERROR.CODE
It was a catch-all I inserted, (without being asked), to ensure that an error message would always be returned, even when it was an unknown error code. Yes, it's a single "=" for both conditions and assignments. And I was made to change it to upper-case. FFS! What they wanted, was:
IF ERROR.MSG = "" THEN
ERROR.MSG = "Error ":ERROR.CODE
ENDBut, the point that I was trying to make was: not that my way is right, but: if they want it doing a particular way, it should be documented - particular as the code-base contains a, pretty much, 50:50 split of both syntaxes.
-
Richard MacCutchan wrote:
Cobol?
:) It's slightly easier than that! It's a (fairly significant) variation on Basic, which comes as part of the Universe DBMS. It's derived from Pick DataBasic (another one you won't have heard of!) and is actually very easy to develop with - albeit limited in scope. i.e. It's for dumb terminal applications. I like it though.
-
Absent a team style document, definitely stand your ground. And certainly ignore weenies who try to quote from other teams' style documents. "But Microsoft says.." "We don't work for Microsoft, you weenie!" I'm a whitespace supremicist as most of you know, so I nearly always use as much vertical space as I deem reasonable. There are times, though, when I would use a series of one-liners. Usually if the tests and actions are very similar -- to show how they are similar.
if ( TestX ) { DoX() } ;
if ( TestY ) { DoY() } ;
if ( TestZ ) { DoX() } ;
...I feel that in this situation, this style leads to more readable/understandable code and that copy/paste errors like above may be more easily spotted. Does the language you're using not allow:
{do something} if {condition}
VAX BASIC V3.9-000
Ready
10 LET X = 42
20 PRINT "yes" IF X = 42
runnhyes
Ready:laugh:
-
I think you may have won the battle, but lost the larger point of it all. What you accomplished was to make yourself difficult to deal with. I don't think that's what you intended.
The difficult we do right away... ...the impossible takes slightly longer.
I didn't just make myself difficult to deal with. I've been like that for about 40 years! :) Hopefully, anyone who knows me, knows that as well as being challenging and pedantic, I will always accept when I'm wrong; never take myself too seriously; and never get personal. Also, I generally give those above me a hard time, rather than my peers. Yep, my chances of promotion are zero - but that matches my ambition. I am way too old to be worrying about career and more than happy to come in and do the day-to-day grunt work.
-
Richard MacCutchan wrote:
Cobol?
:) It's slightly easier than that! It's a (fairly significant) variation on Basic, which comes as part of the Universe DBMS. It's derived from Pick DataBasic (another one you won't have heard of!) and is actually very easy to develop with - albeit limited in scope. i.e. It's for dumb terminal applications. I like it though.
-
I didn't just make myself difficult to deal with. I've been like that for about 40 years! :) Hopefully, anyone who knows me, knows that as well as being challenging and pedantic, I will always accept when I'm wrong; never take myself too seriously; and never get personal. Also, I generally give those above me a hard time, rather than my peers. Yep, my chances of promotion are zero - but that matches my ambition. I am way too old to be worrying about career and more than happy to come in and do the day-to-day grunt work.
Oh, well in that case, carry on :-D
The difficult we do right away... ...the impossible takes slightly longer.
