VS 2022 a genuine wow moment
-
Now redo another block of code, but change "commas" in your comment to something else...then as you're typing the actual code, see if it picks up what your comment said as you're suggesting...
-
I was writing a little bit of code today to replace commas within double quotes enclosed text in a huge string. This string could have multiple segments of double quoted text. I had only written this bit
// Replace all the commas that are between double quotes
char[] linechars = line.ToCharArray();
bool isInQuotes = false;for (int i = 0; i < linechars.Length; i++)
{
if (linechars[i] == '"')//This was predicted by Visual StudioThis IDE can read my code and comments and predict the next if statement. This is amazing. P.S. Before someone points out miserable string handling, I really do not care about code quality. This is a one time use (quick or slow) and dirty utility.
"It is easy to decipher extraterrestrial signals after deciphering Javascript and VB6 themselves.", ISanti[^]
With the possible exception of auto-complete for method names etc., I distrust such suggestions. No IDE, irrespective of how much "AI" it is using, can truly understand my thought processes.
Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows. -- 6079 Smith W.
-
With the possible exception of auto-complete for method names etc., I distrust such suggestions. No IDE, irrespective of how much "AI" it is using, can truly understand my thought processes.
Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows. -- 6079 Smith W.
-
Perhaps you or someone else can explain this
{get; set;}thing to me. There are times when having a getter is appropriate, but far fewer times when having a setter is appropriate. I'm surprised that they make it so easy to mindlessly provide one.Robust Services Core | Software Techniques for Lemmings | Articles
The fox knows many things, but the hedgehog knows one big thing.Greg Utas wrote:
There are times when having a getter is appropriate, but far fewer times when having a setter is appropriate. I'm surprised that they make it so easy to mindlessly provide one.
Agreed, however in the 99% of the cases that I work with, I'm either serializing/deserializing JSON or working with EF or Linq2SQL, both of which require setters on the model.
Latest Article:
Create a Digital Ocean Droplet for .NET Core Web API with a real SSL Certificate on a Domain -
Is that a reflection of the state of AI, or your thought processes, I wonder.
Keep Calm and Carry On
Yes. :|
Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows. -- 6079 Smith W.
-
:laugh: It's not quite that good, but if you do something like this:
var bananas = Fruit.GetFruits(Color.Yellow);
Then later in the method type
foreach(it will autofill with this:foreach(var f in bananas)
If (as I much prefer) you use an explicit type:
List bananas = Fruit.GetFruits(Color.Yellow);
Then the autofill is explicit as well:
foreach(Fruit fruit in bananas)
All on a single TAB press. Once you are used to it, it takes the typing out of the simple stuff, and it leaves you free to concentrate on the "why" you are doing it, instead of the "what".
"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!
It comes a bit difficult to think in C# terms but I`ll try How about the situation when you have so many fruits that they won`t fit in a single list. We are talking about a huge amount of fruits, all of the same type. So you would have to use lists of lists or lists of lists of lists.
List> lemons = Fruit.GetFruitsLists(Color.Yellow);
can autocomplete deal with that? [edit] ok it`s a bit of a wild guess on my behalf, I just don`t know if what I`m saying is correct but if you have a huge number of fruits, all of them rather small in dimension would you keep a single list containing all of them thus resulting a huge solid blob of memory difficult to maneuver, or, second option, partition them into multiple lists which would make a more flexible solution from the memory usage perspective.
-
It comes a bit difficult to think in C# terms but I`ll try How about the situation when you have so many fruits that they won`t fit in a single list. We are talking about a huge amount of fruits, all of the same type. So you would have to use lists of lists or lists of lists of lists.
List> lemons = Fruit.GetFruitsLists(Color.Yellow);
can autocomplete deal with that? [edit] ok it`s a bit of a wild guess on my behalf, I just don`t know if what I`m saying is correct but if you have a huge number of fruits, all of them rather small in dimension would you keep a single list containing all of them thus resulting a huge solid blob of memory difficult to maneuver, or, second option, partition them into multiple lists which would make a more flexible solution from the memory usage perspective.
I would suspect so, but I'm on a tablet at the moment, and don't have VS 2022 installed on it. I'll check tomorrow when I'm back on the desktop.
"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!
-
It comes a bit difficult to think in C# terms but I`ll try How about the situation when you have so many fruits that they won`t fit in a single list. We are talking about a huge amount of fruits, all of the same type. So you would have to use lists of lists or lists of lists of lists.
List> lemons = Fruit.GetFruitsLists(Color.Yellow);
can autocomplete deal with that? [edit] ok it`s a bit of a wild guess on my behalf, I just don`t know if what I`m saying is correct but if you have a huge number of fruits, all of them rather small in dimension would you keep a single list containing all of them thus resulting a huge solid blob of memory difficult to maneuver, or, second option, partition them into multiple lists which would make a more flexible solution from the memory usage perspective.
The edited bit ... Whoo, that's a complicated one ... Lists are pretty efficient at what they do, but it depends on what you actually do with them - this may help: List<T> - Is it really as efficient as you probably think?[^] So a List of Lists (of lists) could be more efficient than a monolithic list. Or it could be massively inefficient if you use it badly. But remember that as it's a class the collection(s) are storing, the memory occupied is the same whether it's an instance or a collection that it holds - the memory for the actual instance will be exactly the same size and number regardless, so nested collections may take up slightly more memory than a single one because of the extra references to collections involved. But only if you let the big one grow to size - otherwise the "double each time it's full" part of the equation starts to consume inordinate amounts of memory (and processing time to copy across as it goes). But then when you use it, the flat model outperforms in it terms of processing, because there is less dereferencing going on. And if you start storing the Fruit as a struct rather than a class to save space and dereferencing, you introduce a whole new kettle of fish because the size of the Fruit starts to impact space and processing when you copy it each time (value types) instead of copying the reference alone. And ... there is a limit on the size of the monolithic collection because of the .NET limit on max size of any one item, and an array of structs is a single chunk of memory
n * sizeof(Fruit)bytes long instead ofn * 4orn * 8bytes long for an array / list of references. Again, this might help: Using struct and class - what's that all about?[^] It's never as simple as it seems, is it? :laugh: [edit] Second link changed - I forgot to CTRL+C before pasting ... :-O [/edit]"I have no idea what I did, but I'm taking full credit for it." - ThisOldTony "Common sense is so rare these days, it sh
-
It comes a bit difficult to think in C# terms but I`ll try How about the situation when you have so many fruits that they won`t fit in a single list. We are talking about a huge amount of fruits, all of the same type. So you would have to use lists of lists or lists of lists of lists.
List> lemons = Fruit.GetFruitsLists(Color.Yellow);
can autocomplete deal with that? [edit] ok it`s a bit of a wild guess on my behalf, I just don`t know if what I`m saying is correct but if you have a huge number of fruits, all of them rather small in dimension would you keep a single list containing all of them thus resulting a huge solid blob of memory difficult to maneuver, or, second option, partition them into multiple lists which would make a more flexible solution from the memory usage perspective.
Interestingly, if you use
varit copes quite well. If you use an explicit type, it doesn't suggest anything. And now, a few minutes later it doesn't cope at all ... but the GetFruits example yesterday does ... VS has just updated itself, that may be the reason. I'll try a shut down and restart of the whole PC to clear out any "old bits" it may still have running later."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 was writing a little bit of code today to replace commas within double quotes enclosed text in a huge string. This string could have multiple segments of double quoted text. I had only written this bit
// Replace all the commas that are between double quotes
char[] linechars = line.ToCharArray();
bool isInQuotes = false;for (int i = 0; i < linechars.Length; i++)
{
if (linechars[i] == '"')//This was predicted by Visual StudioThis IDE can read my code and comments and predict the next if statement. This is amazing. P.S. Before someone points out miserable string handling, I really do not care about code quality. This is a one time use (quick or slow) and dirty utility.
"It is easy to decipher extraterrestrial signals after deciphering Javascript and VB6 themselves.", ISanti[^]
im still annoyed with auto double quotes have string need to setup, value from excel for example
var myString =
go and copy value and paste in
var myString = fancyLongvalue_that i dont want to type out
now need to wrap in quote
var myString = ""fancyLongvalue_that i dont want to type out
😒 type one double quote and gives me two, kinda like hidden clippy somewhere "oh you want string, take two" ok, well delete the second, and move to end of line to add closing quote
var myString = "fancyLongvalue_that i dont want to type out""
😡fancy auto complete but still thinking I want a second quote when already warning with a bunch of error due to first quote
-
I was writing a little bit of code today to replace commas within double quotes enclosed text in a huge string. This string could have multiple segments of double quoted text. I had only written this bit
// Replace all the commas that are between double quotes
char[] linechars = line.ToCharArray();
bool isInQuotes = false;for (int i = 0; i < linechars.Length; i++)
{
if (linechars[i] == '"')//This was predicted by Visual StudioThis IDE can read my code and comments and predict the next if statement. This is amazing. P.S. Before someone points out miserable string handling, I really do not care about code quality. This is a one time use (quick or slow) and dirty utility.
"It is easy to decipher extraterrestrial signals after deciphering Javascript and VB6 themselves.", ISanti[^]
I had to turn off a lot of the "assistance" in VS2019 because it was so visually noisy. Three and four tooltips displayed whenever you moved the cursor or the mouse. Countless icons in the left margin or at the end of each line of code. Grey, unreadable text displayed beneath identifiers. The suggested solutions are based on style and Microsoft conventions, which do not match our local practices. Tailoring the Microsoft settings does not appear to affect their complaints about how you code. Yes, I'm an old bull :elephant: and it's my version of yelling at the kids to "Get off my lawn!".
Software Zen:
delete this; -
It comes a bit difficult to think in C# terms but I`ll try How about the situation when you have so many fruits that they won`t fit in a single list. We are talking about a huge amount of fruits, all of the same type. So you would have to use lists of lists or lists of lists of lists.
List> lemons = Fruit.GetFruitsLists(Color.Yellow);
can autocomplete deal with that? [edit] ok it`s a bit of a wild guess on my behalf, I just don`t know if what I`m saying is correct but if you have a huge number of fruits, all of them rather small in dimension would you keep a single list containing all of them thus resulting a huge solid blob of memory difficult to maneuver, or, second option, partition them into multiple lists which would make a more flexible solution from the memory usage perspective.
I've never had so much data that I had to be concerned with splitting my List<> objects. However, I have had a need for List> before because of the nature of the data. Think of the outer list being for all car manufacturers while each inner list is for each car model they make. Because of how my database data was structured, this made more sense at the time. I could have used linq to combine all car lists into a single list, but it wasn't necessary.
Bond Keep all things as simple as possible, but no simpler. -said someone, somewhere
-
Perhaps you or someone else can explain this
{get; set;}thing to me. There are times when having a getter is appropriate, but far fewer times when having a setter is appropriate. I'm surprised that they make it so easy to mindlessly provide one.Robust Services Core | Software Techniques for Lemmings | Articles
The fox knows many things, but the hedgehog knows one big thing.Just add "private" in front of "set;". Then you can set the value internally to your class but not from outside the class. The getter would have the same access as the property itself.
Bond Keep all things as simple as possible, but no simpler. -said someone, somewhere
-
Kornfeld Eliyahu Peter wrote:
Wait and see - after enough suggestions you will find that most of them are plain stupid repetition of what you done before (a true no-brain op)...
I had more obviously wrong suggestions than cases where it generated what I wanted, but that's not why I turned it off after a few weeks. I pulled the plug because about 5-10% of the suggestions were dangerously wrong. Things that looked OK at first glance, but which had subtle logic errors in them. Trying to debug my own wrong think is bad enough, when the code running is ever so slightly off of what I intended was far worse.
Did you ever see history portrayed as an old man with a wise brow and pulseless heart, weighing all things in the balance of reason? Is not rather the genius of history like an eternal, imploring maiden, full of fire, with a burning heart and flaming soul, humanly warm and humanly beautiful? --Zachris Topelius
I've found that most of the suggestions (80%+) are exactly what I wanted to do. I've been pretty wowed by the technology. Maybe it's because it's looking over my shoulder and learning from a truly great programming master ;-)
-
I was writing a little bit of code today to replace commas within double quotes enclosed text in a huge string. This string could have multiple segments of double quoted text. I had only written this bit
// Replace all the commas that are between double quotes
char[] linechars = line.ToCharArray();
bool isInQuotes = false;for (int i = 0; i < linechars.Length; i++)
{
if (linechars[i] == '"')//This was predicted by Visual StudioThis IDE can read my code and comments and predict the next if statement. This is amazing. P.S. Before someone points out miserable string handling, I really do not care about code quality. This is a one time use (quick or slow) and dirty utility.
"It is easy to decipher extraterrestrial signals after deciphering Javascript and VB6 themselves.", ISanti[^]
Yes, another convenience that will allow developers to think less...
Steve Naidamast Sr. Software Engineer Black Falcon Software, Inc. blackfalconsoftware@outlook.com
-
The edited bit ... Whoo, that's a complicated one ... Lists are pretty efficient at what they do, but it depends on what you actually do with them - this may help: List<T> - Is it really as efficient as you probably think?[^] So a List of Lists (of lists) could be more efficient than a monolithic list. Or it could be massively inefficient if you use it badly. But remember that as it's a class the collection(s) are storing, the memory occupied is the same whether it's an instance or a collection that it holds - the memory for the actual instance will be exactly the same size and number regardless, so nested collections may take up slightly more memory than a single one because of the extra references to collections involved. But only if you let the big one grow to size - otherwise the "double each time it's full" part of the equation starts to consume inordinate amounts of memory (and processing time to copy across as it goes). But then when you use it, the flat model outperforms in it terms of processing, because there is less dereferencing going on. And if you start storing the Fruit as a struct rather than a class to save space and dereferencing, you introduce a whole new kettle of fish because the size of the Fruit starts to impact space and processing when you copy it each time (value types) instead of copying the reference alone. And ... there is a limit on the size of the monolithic collection because of the .NET limit on max size of any one item, and an array of structs is a single chunk of memory
n * sizeof(Fruit)bytes long instead ofn * 4orn * 8bytes long for an array / list of references. Again, this might help: Using struct and class - what's that all about?[^] It's never as simple as it seems, is it? :laugh: [edit] Second link changed - I forgot to CTRL+C before pasting ... :-O [/edit]"I have no idea what I did, but I'm taking full credit for it." - ThisOldTony "Common sense is so rare these days, it sh
Thanks for explaining
Quote:
Second link changed - I forgot to CTRL+C before pasting ...
just noticed your edit. I think public logging of edit time would make a nice CP feature.
-
Thanks for explaining
Quote:
Second link changed - I forgot to CTRL+C before pasting ...
just noticed your edit. I think public logging of edit time would make a nice CP feature.
Calin Cali wrote:
I think public logging of edit time would make a nice CP feature.
You mean like the "modified 20hrs ago." text at the bottom of the message? :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!
-
It is amazing... until it is not... Wait and see - after enough suggestions you will find that most of them are plain stupid repetition of what you done before (a true no-brain op)...
“Real stupidity beats artificial intelligence every time.” ― Terry Pratchett, Hogfather
80% of my code is "plain stupid repetition of what [I've] done before"
-
Calin Cali wrote:
I think public logging of edit time would make a nice CP feature.
You mean like the "modified 20hrs ago." text at the bottom of the message? :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!
Quote:
You mean like the "modified 20hrs ago."
(only if you knew what you are talking about) yeah, with a small font and in brackets.
-
I've never had so much data that I had to be concerned with splitting my List<> objects. However, I have had a need for List> before because of the nature of the data. Think of the outer list being for all car manufacturers while each inner list is for each car model they make. Because of how my database data was structured, this made more sense at the time. I could have used linq to combine all car lists into a single list, but it wasn't necessary.
Bond Keep all things as simple as possible, but no simpler. -said someone, somewhere
Quote:
Think of the outer list being for all car manufacturers while each inner list is for each car model they make
Yeah you could push that logic even further by making 'car model' a list on its own containing all the car model parts (for a car service shop use for instance). List in a list saves you sorting time but a list is just a container it doesn`t provide any clue about what`s inside other than it`s name so you need to keep a separate account about the list tree structure, levels if the tree is rather deep/complex.
