I wonder!!!!

[Thomas Weller 0]

I'm afraid I don't get what you mean... :~ Regards Thomas

_Programming today is a race between software engineers striving to build bigger and better idiot-proof programs, and the Universe trying to produce bigger and better idiots. So far, the Universe is winning.

Programmer - an organism that turns coffee into software._

[AhsanS]

Yes it compiles and where the reference is used it is used as using abc.abc it is working perfectly fine and perhaps for these sorts of issue, i am looking into each file again.

Ahsan Ullah Senior Software Engineer

[Thomas Weller 0]

AhsanS wrote:

where the reference is used it is used as using abc.abc

So the author of this piece of code accidentally created a nested namespace... This is syntactically correct and being allowed to do so makes perfect sense - generally. Of course it makes no sense at all to do it that way - I bet this is a CPD (CPD = copy paste desaster :) ). Regards Thomas

_Programming today is a race between software engineers striving to build bigger and better idiot-proof programs, and the Universe trying to produce bigger and better idiots. So far, the Universe is winning.

Programmer - an organism that turns coffee into software._

[PIEBALDconsult]

Using fully-specified names do what you say; not the using directive.

[Thomas Weller 0]

PIEBALDconsult wrote:

Using fully-specified names do what you say; not the using directive.

There is absolutely no difference (in terms of syntactical functionality) between the two alternatives. The first is totally equivalent to the second. :^) The only difference is that with fully qualified type names you will end up with horrible long lines of code that say nothing more than if the programmer had used a using statement. - You will produce code that tends to become unreadable and your keyboard will soon give up... Regards Thomas

_Programming today is a race between software engineers striving to build bigger and better idiot-proof programs, and the Universe trying to produce bigger and better idiots. So far, the Universe is winning.

Programmer - an organism that turns coffee into software._

[AhsanS]

it might be CPD, but he must have known the issue when using "using abc.abc"????

Ahsan Ullah Senior Software Engineer

[Thomas Weller 0]

AhsanS wrote:

he must have known the issue

Maybe, maybe not. There are some tools/functionalities out there that generate those using statements automatically for you (e.g. VS 2008 and Resharper can do that). And pressing Ctrl+Enter when Intellisense offers you something slightly strange but working (like the second abc after the first) is also simpler than thinking about the code. So chances are he was just lazy. Just taking something that reliably works without really understanding why... :suss: Regards Thomas

_Programming today is a race between software engineers striving to build bigger and better idiot-proof programs, and the Universe trying to produce bigger and better idiots. So far, the Universe is winning.

Programmer - an organism that turns coffee into software._

[cliran]

I think it's pretty obvious. It's just that the good fellas down at Redmond decided to allow this so we could enjoy some hilarious coding horror posts

[notmasteryet]

Try to compile following without first or second using:

using System; // 1

namespace MyCode.Console
{
using System; // 2

class Program
{
    static void Main(string\[\] args)
    {
        Console.WriteLine("Test");
    }
}

}

[Megidolaon]

Actually this doesn't force the developer to do anythin, on the contrary. It allows to use simple class names instead of full class names. If you hvae a name that can refer to more thsn 1 class, you get a compiler error and forced to use the full name, regardless of usings. But usings that are not use at the beginning of the file but at the beginning of a namespace sounds like more like an accident than anythign else.