Strong Bad Programming

Daniel Turini

John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote: IMHO, this is a wholly inappropriate use of the enum construct. So, you now know the "cool! it compiled!" programmer. John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote: identifier names changed to protect the innocent This is not the old JS we all know... I see dumb people

Alvaro Mendez

:omg: I hope those contants are not actually named a, b, c, d, etc. You're right though, constant values should be declared with const int. I faced this issue recently in C# where enums cannot used in place of ints (without casting). Regards, Alvaro

Give a man a fish, he owes you one fish. Teach a man to fish, you give up your monopoly on fisheries.

realJSOP

Actually, it's proprietary code, so I couldn't use the actual variable names... ------- sig starts "...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001 "You won't like me when I'm angry..." - Dr. Bruce Banner Please review the Legal Disclaimer in my bio. ------- sig ends

Daniel Turini

John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote: Actually, it's proprietary code Well, I wouldn't want to be the owner... :) I see dumb people

realJSOP

You're right - it's a stretch. For what it's worth, templates don't come into play in this particular instance. And it's a pain in the ass to have to search for the value of something when it's used to control incrementing/decrementing, especially if you are expecting to find it defined as a constant, and not an enum... ------- sig starts "...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001 "You won't like me when I'm angry..." - Dr. Bruce Banner Please review the Legal Disclaimer in my bio. ------- sig ends

Tim Smith

But that doesn't work well with some types of classes, such as H file only classes where you can't just define the value of the const int anywhere. This is another case where the ivory tower and the real world are in conflict. Tim Smith I'm going to patent thought. I have yet to see any prior art.

realJSOP

The guyy that wrote this code hasn't worked here for some time - otherwise, I'd offer to stick a fork in his head. :) ------- sig starts "...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001 "You won't like me when I'm angry..." - Dr. Bruce Banner Please review the Legal Disclaimer in my bio. ------- sig ends

Alvaro Mendez

Tim Smith wrote: But that doesn't work well with some types of classes, such as H file only classes where you can't just define the value of the const int anywhere. That's true. A workaround for those cases is to declare and initialize the constant outside the class (at namespace scope). Regards, Alvaro

Give a man a fish, he owes you one fish. Teach a man to fish, you give up your monopoly on fisheries.

cmk

Not sure i agree with it being bad code. However, like all such statements, it really depends on the context in which it is used. If you have a variable that you want to be in one of several states you use an enum. If there is a calculation that uses a variable that has a 1:1 relationship with a state then i don't see a problem with casting the enum to a long. The alternative is to switch on the enum - which is far less elegant. There is a reason the language allows you to assign values to enum elements. I've seen this many times over the past 15yrs. ...cmk Save the whales - collect the whole set

Ravi Bhavnani

Gary Wheeler wrote: You could then define auto-increment and auto-decrement operators for the type to give you the sequence. But only if the sequence didn't contain duplicates. /ravi My new year's resolution: 2048 x 1536 Home | Articles | Freeware | Music ravib@ravib.com

Gabriel 2

That's nothing. I've seen the following code, which hasn't been superated by any other stupid idea. This guy implemented a way to return from a function (in the middle of it, so that if the function is called again, execution will continue from where it returned from the previous time. The code was something like this: #define START_FUNC_WITH_MEMORY() static lastLine; switch (lastLine){case 0: #define RETURN_HERE(x) {line = x; return;} case x: #define END_FUNC_WITH_MEMORY() } ProcessData () { START_FUNCTION_WITH_MEMORY() ... if (moreDataRequired) RETURN_HERE(1); ... if (moreDataRequired) RETURN_HERE(2); ... if (moreDataRequired) RETURN_HERE(3); ... if (moreDataRequired) RETURN_HERE(4); ... END_FUNCTION_WITH_MEMORY() } Which, replacing macros becomes: ProcessData () { static lastLine; switch (lastLine) { case 0: ... if (moreDataRequired) {lastLine=1; return;} case 1: ... if (moreDataRequired) {lastLine=2; return;} case 2: ... if (moreDataRequired) {lastLine=3; return;} case 3: ... } }

Roger Wright

Yuck!:omg: Though to be honest, I've seen/coded worse...:-O I've felt much better since I gave up hope.

Michael Dunn

That is actually pretty standard practice, because (as was already mentioned) it in effect creates a scoped constant. If you meet a language lawyer he'll probably argue that this is "the right way":

class CFoo
{
public:
static const int a = 4;
static const int b = 0;
// and so on...
};

however that syntax (initializing a static member in the header) doesn't work on all compilers, most notably VC 6. --Mike-- Personal stuff:: Ericahist | Homepage Shareware stuff:: 1ClickPicGrabber | RightClick-Encrypt CP stuff:: CP SearchBar v2.0.2 | C++ Forum FAQ ----

Andy Brummer

I was forced to convert some VB6 code written in 2002 where the developer used *LINE NUMBERS*. In fact he started to tell me how much better they make coding, and why VB was great before I could chew my own arm off to escape.
Though, I did have one developer ask me how to tell if an integer was negative. Stunned, it took me a while to answer less then zero and they went off pleased whith their new found knowlege. I made it a point to never go near their code ever. My goal is to look at code like a chessmaster looks at a chessboard to see positions and possibilites beyond lines and characters.

markkuk

It looks like an attempt to implement coroutines in C macros. It's actually a respectable programming technique (it's described in Knuth), but not fashionable in modern environments.

l a u r e n

:laugh:

"there is no spoon"
biz stuff about me

Nemanja Trifunovic

Michael Dunn wrote: If you meet a language lawyer he'll probably argue that this is "the right way": Words from the Master himself[^]: I tend to use the "enum trick" because it's portable and doesn't tempt me to use non-standard extensions of the in-class initialization syntax.

Roger Wright

andy brummer wrote: I did have one developer ask me how to tell if an integer was negative It takes very advanced pschoanalysis skills to determine whether an integer is truly negative, or merely having a bad day. Most programmers never learn these skills, though supremely gifted ones, like yourself, develop an uncanny intuition about coding such tests over time. As a fallback, he can simply square the integer - if the result is positive, there's a 50% chance that it was negative. I've felt much better since I gave up hope.

Rick York

Ah yes, right back in character. ;) PS - I think I have a skin or two of your's on some of my converted cars. :) __________________________________________ a two cent stamp short of going postal.

realJSOP

Converted cars? Converted to what? ------- sig starts "...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001 "You won't like me when I'm angry..." - Dr. Bruce Banner Please review the Legal Disclaimer in my bio. ------- sig ends