dotNET Rant [modified]
-
ok, this is not a programming question. It's a rant! given,
object one = 0;
object two = 0;
bool same = one == two;what would you expect the value of
sameto be? WRONG! it's false! Whoever thought that was a valid result, is cracked!:mad::mad::mad::mad::mad: [edit] so, after going home and resting my brain a bit. it seems as though i'm the one that was cracked. thanks for the refresher course everyone. it is of course doing a reference comparison. which is correct. you all know how it is when you struggle with something and get too close to the trees to see the forest. anyway thanks to everyone for being your normally brutally honest selves. cheers. :-D [/edit]Fight Big Government:
http://obamacareclassaction.com/
http://obamacaretruth.org/modified on Friday, May 7, 2010 1:08 AM
I would expect it to be false. You are comparing two object instances for reference equality, and clearly
oneis not in the same memory location astwo.Scott Dorman
Microsoft® MVP - Visual C# | MCPD President - Tampa Bay IASA [Blog][Articles][Forum Guidelines]
Hey, hey, hey. Don't be mean. We don't have to be mean because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are. - Buckaroo Banzai
-
Rama Krishna Vavilala wrote:
It has to be false. What else can it be?
Why? One would expect that the comparators of the boxed values would be used. so, the result would be true, as I initially expected. I understand what's happening, but I don't understand why the dotNETtors decided this was correct.
Fight Big Government:
http://obamacareclassaction.com/
http://obamacaretruth.org/ahmed zahmed wrote:
One would expect that the comparators of the boxed values would be used. so, the result would be true, as I initially expected.
Why do you think these are being boxed? You are clearly assigning values to an object instance. This doesn't result in any boxing operations.
Scott Dorman
Microsoft® MVP - Visual C# | MCPD President - Tampa Bay IASA [Blog][Articles][Forum Guidelines]
Hey, hey, hey. Don't be mean. We don't have to be mean because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are. - Buckaroo Banzai
-
ok, this is not a programming question. It's a rant! given,
object one = 0;
object two = 0;
bool same = one == two;what would you expect the value of
sameto be? WRONG! it's false! Whoever thought that was a valid result, is cracked!:mad::mad::mad::mad::mad: [edit] so, after going home and resting my brain a bit. it seems as though i'm the one that was cracked. thanks for the refresher course everyone. it is of course doing a reference comparison. which is correct. you all know how it is when you struggle with something and get too close to the trees to see the forest. anyway thanks to everyone for being your normally brutally honest selves. cheers. :-D [/edit]Fight Big Government:
http://obamacareclassaction.com/
http://obamacaretruth.org/modified on Friday, May 7, 2010 1:08 AM
Of course it's false! You just compared the references of two OBJECTS, not two values. It seems that you're the one who's "cracked".
A guide to posting questions on CodeProject[^]
Dave Kreskowiak Microsoft MVP Visual Developer - Visual Basic
2006, 2007, 2008
But no longer in 2009... -
Ian's next book could be titled "The Mystery of the Vanishing NaN" then? :)
Luc Pattyn [Forum Guidelines] [Why QA sucks] [My Articles]
Prolific encyclopedia fixture proof-reader browser patron addict?
We all depend on the beast below.
Luc Pattyn wrote:
The Mystery of the Vanishing NaN
It's no mystery that any NaaN placed in front of me will vanish.
-
ok, this is not a programming question. It's a rant! given,
object one = 0;
object two = 0;
bool same = one == two;what would you expect the value of
sameto be? WRONG! it's false! Whoever thought that was a valid result, is cracked!:mad::mad::mad::mad::mad: [edit] so, after going home and resting my brain a bit. it seems as though i'm the one that was cracked. thanks for the refresher course everyone. it is of course doing a reference comparison. which is correct. you all know how it is when you struggle with something and get too close to the trees to see the forest. anyway thanks to everyone for being your normally brutally honest selves. cheers. :-D [/edit]Fight Big Government:
http://obamacareclassaction.com/
http://obamacaretruth.org/modified on Friday, May 7, 2010 1:08 AM
ahmed zahmed wrote:
Whoever thought that was a valid result, is cracked
Well duh, it's supposed to be different, you're one who's cracked! Why don't you read up on value vs. reference comparisons. Marc
-
obviously, my statement was an opinion. but, i'll deal with reality rather than my wishfulness.
Fight Big Government:
http://obamacareclassaction.com/
http://obamacaretruth.org/ahmed zahmed wrote:
my statement was an opinion
No, your statement is not an opinion, it is a falsehood. Much like the return of your two object comparison, hahaha. Marc
-
ahmed zahmed wrote:
my statement was an opinion
No, your statement is not an opinion, it is a falsehood. Much like the return of your two object comparison, hahaha. Marc
nice. hope you feel good about yourself.
Fight Big Government:
http://obamacareclassaction.com/
http://obamacaretruth.org/ -
ahmed zahmed wrote:
since only primitives get boxed
only value types get boxed, i.e. when an object is required. I wouldn't call a struct primitive. :)
Luc Pattyn [Forum Guidelines] [Why QA sucks] [My Articles]
Prolific encyclopedia fixture proof-reader browser patron addict?
We all depend on the beast below.
yes, true enough. still in the context where i'm dealing with these boxed "value types" the only values boxed will be primitives. but thanks for the reminder.
Fight Big Government:
http://obamacareclassaction.com/
http://obamacaretruth.org/ -
I would expect it to be false. You are comparing two object instances for reference equality, and clearly
oneis not in the same memory location astwo.Scott Dorman
Microsoft® MVP - Visual C# | MCPD President - Tampa Bay IASA [Blog][Articles][Forum Guidelines]
Hey, hey, hey. Don't be mean. We don't have to be mean because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are. - Buckaroo Banzai
yes, a distinction i forgot in my frustration. thanks for the refresher.
Fight Big Government:
http://obamacareclassaction.com/
http://obamacaretruth.org/ -
Of course it's false! You just compared the references of two OBJECTS, not two values. It seems that you're the one who's "cracked".
A guide to posting questions on CodeProject[^]
Dave Kreskowiak Microsoft MVP Visual Developer - Visual Basic
2006, 2007, 2008
But no longer in 2009...well, you know how it is, i'm sure when you're doing something all day long and your brain gets fried. yep, i was the one cracked, for sure.
Fight Big Government:
http://obamacareclassaction.com/
http://obamacaretruth.org/ -
ahmed zahmed wrote:
Whoever thought that was a valid result, is cracked
Well duh, it's supposed to be different, you're one who's cracked! Why don't you read up on value vs. reference comparisons. Marc
lol, yep you are right. that's me, the cracked one.
Fight Big Government:
http://obamacareclassaction.com/
http://obamacaretruth.org/ -
ahmed zahmed wrote:
One would expect that the comparators of the boxed values would be used. so, the result would be true, as I initially expected.
Why do you think these are being boxed? You are clearly assigning values to an object instance. This doesn't result in any boxing operations.
Scott Dorman
Microsoft® MVP - Visual C# | MCPD President - Tampa Bay IASA [Blog][Articles][Forum Guidelines]
Hey, hey, hey. Don't be mean. We don't have to be mean because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are. - Buckaroo Banzai
ok, perhaps I'm misunderstanding something, but aren't value types boxed when assigned to an object? or passed as a parameter to a function whose parameter type is object?
Fight Big Government:
http://obamacareclassaction.com/
http://obamacaretruth.org/ -
ok, this is not a programming question. It's a rant! given,
object one = 0;
object two = 0;
bool same = one == two;what would you expect the value of
sameto be? WRONG! it's false! Whoever thought that was a valid result, is cracked!:mad::mad::mad::mad::mad: [edit] so, after going home and resting my brain a bit. it seems as though i'm the one that was cracked. thanks for the refresher course everyone. it is of course doing a reference comparison. which is correct. you all know how it is when you struggle with something and get too close to the trees to see the forest. anyway thanks to everyone for being your normally brutally honest selves. cheers. :-D [/edit]Fight Big Government:
http://obamacareclassaction.com/
http://obamacaretruth.org/modified on Friday, May 7, 2010 1:08 AM
ahmed zahmed wrote:
so, after going home and resting my brain a bit. it seems as though i'm the one that was cracked. thanks for the refresher course everyone. it is of course doing a reference comparison. which is correct. you all know how it is when you struggle with something and get too close to the trees to see the forest. anyway thanks to everyone for being your normally brutally honest selves. cheers.
When was the last time you took a vacation? This happens to me when I've not taken a vacation for too long......
-
ok, this is not a programming question. It's a rant! given,
object one = 0;
object two = 0;
bool same = one == two;what would you expect the value of
sameto be? WRONG! it's false! Whoever thought that was a valid result, is cracked!:mad::mad::mad::mad::mad: [edit] so, after going home and resting my brain a bit. it seems as though i'm the one that was cracked. thanks for the refresher course everyone. it is of course doing a reference comparison. which is correct. you all know how it is when you struggle with something and get too close to the trees to see the forest. anyway thanks to everyone for being your normally brutally honest selves. cheers. :-D [/edit]Fight Big Government:
http://obamacareclassaction.com/
http://obamacaretruth.org/modified on Friday, May 7, 2010 1:08 AM
-
ok, this is not a programming question. It's a rant! given,
object one = 0;
object two = 0;
bool same = one == two;what would you expect the value of
sameto be? WRONG! it's false! Whoever thought that was a valid result, is cracked!:mad::mad::mad::mad::mad: [edit] so, after going home and resting my brain a bit. it seems as though i'm the one that was cracked. thanks for the refresher course everyone. it is of course doing a reference comparison. which is correct. you all know how it is when you struggle with something and get too close to the trees to see the forest. anyway thanks to everyone for being your normally brutally honest selves. cheers. :-D [/edit]Fight Big Government:
http://obamacareclassaction.com/
http://obamacaretruth.org/modified on Friday, May 7, 2010 1:08 AM
You remember me
Javanewbies using the==operator with strings... :rolleyes:If the Lord God Almighty had consulted me before embarking upon the Creation, I would have recommended something simpler. -- Alfonso the Wise, 13th Century King of Castile.
This is going on my arrogant assumptions. You may have a superb reason why I'm completely wrong. -- Iain Clarke
[My articles] -
ok, this is not a programming question. It's a rant! given,
object one = 0;
object two = 0;
bool same = one == two;what would you expect the value of
sameto be? WRONG! it's false! Whoever thought that was a valid result, is cracked!:mad::mad::mad::mad::mad: [edit] so, after going home and resting my brain a bit. it seems as though i'm the one that was cracked. thanks for the refresher course everyone. it is of course doing a reference comparison. which is correct. you all know how it is when you struggle with something and get too close to the trees to see the forest. anyway thanks to everyone for being your normally brutally honest selves. cheers. :-D [/edit]Fight Big Government:
http://obamacareclassaction.com/
http://obamacaretruth.org/modified on Friday, May 7, 2010 1:08 AM
The deeper question is why does auto boxing not return the same object.
-
ok, this is not a programming question. It's a rant! given,
object one = 0;
object two = 0;
bool same = one == two;what would you expect the value of
sameto be? WRONG! it's false! Whoever thought that was a valid result, is cracked!:mad::mad::mad::mad::mad: [edit] so, after going home and resting my brain a bit. it seems as though i'm the one that was cracked. thanks for the refresher course everyone. it is of course doing a reference comparison. which is correct. you all know how it is when you struggle with something and get too close to the trees to see the forest. anyway thanks to everyone for being your normally brutally honest selves. cheers. :-D [/edit]Fight Big Government:
http://obamacareclassaction.com/
http://obamacaretruth.org/modified on Friday, May 7, 2010 1:08 AM
void* one = 0; void* two = 0; BOOL same = (one == two); // false - the lvalues of one and two are different BOOL sameValue = (*one == *two); // true - the rvalues are the same *one = 1; *two = 2; same = (one == two); // false - the lvalues are different sameValue = (*one == *two); // false - the rvalues are different now There's a reason why C# is called a C-based language... you may wish to brush up on your knowledge of pointers...
-- What's a signature?
-
ahmed zahmed wrote:
perhaps, it got optimized away.
I very much doubt it. The C# compiler only seems to do trivial constant folding (without using commutativity etc) and some limited dead code elimination (after an unconditional return etc) The JIT compiler does the rest (which is not a lot, either) If it changes the result it is not an "optimization" but a bug. And, this was a Debug build, as can easily be seen. Here is the same code compiled in Release mode.
.locals init ( \[0\] object x, \[1\] object y) L\_0000: ldc.i4.0 L\_0001: box int32 L\_0006: stloc.0 L\_0007: ldc.i4.0 L\_0008: box int32 L\_000d: stloc.1 L\_000e: ldloc.0 L\_000f: ldloc.1 L\_0010: ceq L\_0012: call void \[mscorlib\]System.Console::WriteLine(bool) L\_0017: ret -
ok, this is not a programming question. It's a rant! given,
object one = 0;
object two = 0;
bool same = one == two;what would you expect the value of
sameto be? WRONG! it's false! Whoever thought that was a valid result, is cracked!:mad::mad::mad::mad::mad: [edit] so, after going home and resting my brain a bit. it seems as though i'm the one that was cracked. thanks for the refresher course everyone. it is of course doing a reference comparison. which is correct. you all know how it is when you struggle with something and get too close to the trees to see the forest. anyway thanks to everyone for being your normally brutally honest selves. cheers. :-D [/edit]Fight Big Government:
http://obamacareclassaction.com/
http://obamacaretruth.org/modified on Friday, May 7, 2010 1:08 AM
-
The deeper question is why does auto boxing not return the same object.
Because keeping all 2^32 possible integers around until they are (maybe) reused would waste up to 48 GB of RAM (or 96 GB on 64-bit systems, as the overhead of objects is higher there). And I don't really want the Java behavior where all integers between -128 and 127 return the same object, but all other integers don't.
