Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Code Project
  1. Home
  2. Other Discussions
  3. Clever Code
  4. Comment Switching

Comment Switching

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Clever Code
debuggingdiscussion
20 Posts 10 Posters 92 Views 1 Watching
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • M musefan

    way too much typing

    My opinions are right, and yours are wrong! (or at least that is my opinion)

    B Offline
    B Offline
    Brady Kelly
    wrote on last edited by
    #11

    Are you using notepad to write code? OK, two key-presses vs. four is a win, but certainly not a lot of typing.

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • M musefan

      way too much typing

      My opinions are right, and yours are wrong! (or at least that is my opinion)

      F Offline
      F Offline
      fjdiewornncalwe
      wrote on last edited by
      #12

      The proper way is the right way. With intellisense and all the other editor enhancements that make life easier for developers, the "too much typing" excuse doesn't hold water. If you have issues typing, then you need to brush up on that because writing code incorrectly at the outset is just going to make a sustainment developer's job much more difficult.

      I wasn't, now I am, then I won't be anymore.

      1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • R RobCroll

        It would be even cleverer if you used string.Empty instead of "". :)

        "You get that on the big jobs."

        G Offline
        G Offline
        gumi_r msn com
        wrote on last edited by
        #13

        Actually that wouldn't compile I think.

        string.Empty

        is readonly so you can't initialize a static variable with it as it could theoretically change during runtime.

        R 1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • G gumi_r msn com

          Actually that wouldn't compile I think.

          string.Empty

          is readonly so you can't initialize a static variable with it as it could theoretically change during runtime.

          R Offline
          R Offline
          RobCroll
          wrote on last edited by
          #14

          You had me worried there for a second. I've done find replace on "" on large projects (millions of lines) and never had any adverse affects, let alone a compile error. public static string MyString = string.Empty; compiles for me.

          "You get that on the big jobs."

          G 1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • R RobCroll

            You had me worried there for a second. I've done find replace on "" on large projects (millions of lines) and never had any adverse affects, let alone a compile error. public static string MyString = string.Empty; compiles for me.

            "You get that on the big jobs."

            G Offline
            G Offline
            gumi_r msn com
            wrote on last edited by
            #15

            Lol sorry, I actually misread and thought it was

            public const string MyString = string.Empty

            Sorry about that.

            R 1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • G gumi_r msn com

              Lol sorry, I actually misread and thought it was

              public const string MyString = string.Empty

              Sorry about that.

              R Offline
              R Offline
              RobCroll
              wrote on last edited by
              #16

              Obscure but still worth noting. I guess at the end of the day who would set a const to equal ""?

              "You get that on the big jobs."

              L F 2 Replies Last reply
              0
              • R RobCroll

                Obscure but still worth noting. I guess at the end of the day who would set a const to equal ""?

                "You get that on the big jobs."

                L Offline
                L Offline
                Lost User
                wrote on last edited by
                #17

                Actually its a constant equal to string.Empty... which ahh is already what you should be using. Kinda like when you see

                const bool TRUE = true;

                Note: I have never actually seen this except in code horrors responding jokes.

                Computers have been intelligent for a long time now. It just so happens that the program writers are about as effective as a room full of monkeys trying to crank out a copy of Hamlet.

                1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • M musefan

                  way too much typing

                  My opinions are right, and yours are wrong! (or at least that is my opinion)

                  P Offline
                  P Offline
                  puromtec1
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #18

                  String.Empty runs faster.

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • R RobCroll

                    Obscure but still worth noting. I guess at the end of the day who would set a const to equal ""?

                    "You get that on the big jobs."

                    F Offline
                    F Offline
                    fjdiewornncalwe
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #19

                    RobCroll wrote:

                    I guess at the end of the day who would set a const to equal ""?

                    Have you been in the Q&A recently? :)

                    I wasn't, now I am, then I won't be anymore.

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • J Jorgen Sigvardsson

                      How about

                      public static string MyString =
                      #if USE_MY_SPECIAL_DEBUG_VALUE
                      @"DEBUG VALUE"
                      #else
                      ""
                      #endif
                      ;

                      Surely, this must be a lot more maintainable than a very cryptic looking comment that's going to make your successors wonder WTF?

                      -- Kein Mitleid Für Die Mehrheit

                      K Offline
                      K Offline
                      Ken Booth
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #20

                      I agree - not only more readable, but the line

                      #define USE_MY_SPECIAL_DEBUG_VALUE

                      can be commented or uncommented with one mouse click - no keystrokes required!

                      -- Regards, Ken I AM

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      Reply
                      • Reply as topic
                      Log in to reply
                      • Oldest to Newest
                      • Newest to Oldest
                      • Most Votes


                      • Login

                      • Don't have an account? Register

                      • Login or register to search.
                      • First post
                        Last post
                      0
                      • Categories
                      • Recent
                      • Tags
                      • Popular
                      • World
                      • Users
                      • Groups