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. The Lounge
  3. What is meant by Defensive Programming?

What is meant by Defensive Programming?

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved The Lounge
questioncollaboration
25 Posts 22 Posters 0 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.
  • S Super Lloyd

    I think it's probably very simple which probably already do... it's when you write some public method you don't just assume that the parameter will be kind of alright, but you cater for inappropriate input, such as null, large integer (causing overflow) etc, etc...

    All in one Menu-Ribbon Bar DirectX for WinRT/C# since 2013! Taking over the world since 1371!

    W Offline
    W Offline
    Wynter Dragon
    wrote on last edited by
    #21

    Always validate your parameters and assume your user is an absolute moron. Then set up logging and early reporting messages back to you so that when they call you up all frantic you already have the problem solved. ;) It's how Scotty does it... "Aye Cap'n"

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • K Kirk 10389821

      I always thought about programming differently after I accidentally coded a few infinite loops that crashed because of lack of stack space, or what not... Later, it was described as defensive programming. My favorite example, is one I blew up. Given a string, pad it to the left until it is 32 characters in length. A$ = " " + A$ until len(A$) = 32 Which, of course, if you are given a string that is already too long, this will crash. So, quickly I learned While len(A$) < 32 do A$ = " " + A$ Always look for the comparison that avoids doing work under the most conditions. Here, there are a LOT of times you know to stop. The = was limited to exactly one condition. That one lesson, I have used over the years, and I refactor code that is logically correct when changed to be like this. The reduction of errors/issues is amazing. (truth is, I hate debugging, and prefer to desk check my code. I grew up with OVERNIGHT compilers, so syntax errors cost you a day. In fact, all errors cost you a day)

      L Offline
      L Offline
      Lost User
      wrote on last edited by
      #22

      Kirk 10389821 wrote:

      While len(A$) < 32 do A$ = " " + A$

      Why use a loop when you can do something like A$ = Right(put 32 spaces in quotes here + A$, 32) Curious - if I actually put 32 spaces in quotes, it gets trimmed. hmmm.

      There are strangers on the Plain, Croaker

      K 1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • L Lost User

        Kirk 10389821 wrote:

        While len(A$) < 32 do A$ = " " + A$

        Why use a loop when you can do something like A$ = Right(put 32 spaces in quotes here + A$, 32) Curious - if I actually put 32 spaces in quotes, it gets trimmed. hmmm.

        There are strangers on the Plain, Croaker

        K Offline
        K Offline
        Kirk 10389821
        wrote on last edited by
        #23

        Oh, I have done it that way in a hurry! But what happens when len(A$) is NEAR the limit of a string length (ie has less than 32 characters left). You could actually lose the right side of the string!!! Also, the 32 was chosen for simplicity, as was the space. I believe the actual code had a variable for the length, and another for the padding character. But the nuances is what makes defensive programming powerful. Most people don't think in terms of limits. They EXPECT a "small" string to be passed in when they are WRITING the code, and it NEVER dawns on them how the code could be called in the future. I know from first (and second) hand experience that defensive style programming reduces errors and the debugging efforts required. I would rather fail with ASSERT() failures than to let code execute with bad parameters and pray for good luck.

        1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • M Maximilien

          Well you are right My example was poorly designed.

          I'd rather be phishing!

          K Offline
          K Offline
          kdmote
          wrote on last edited by
          #24

          Hey, props to you for just striking out your code instead of deleting it. I think it is fantastic when people are humble (and self-confident) enough to let others learn from their mistakes. (Especially because I'm sure I might have made the same one!)

          1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • A Amarnath S

            No matter how my team-members code, my code should work fine :confused:

            S Offline
            S Offline
            Sucramsy
            wrote on last edited by
            #25

            I knew a VBA programmer who used "On Error Resume Next" X| as the first line of every Procedure/Function/Method. System never crashed. Half the code never ran but it never crashed.

            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