|
Stepan Kobzey wrote: if something went wrong
I don't think that's the responsibilty of this method. That should have been performed before calling the method.
Stepan Kobzey wrote: is empty guid
If the method is asked to perform the action, it should perform it.
Stepan Kobzey wrote: bites in memory
So what?
Basically, what goes wrong if you remove the check entirely?
It sounds like a case of premature optimization -- if the guid is never empty, then you are actually decreasing performance because you perform the check every time.
You'll never get very far if all you do is follow instructions.
|
|
|
|
|
Should have been:
if (userQueryID.ToString() == "00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000000") return null; He should've known that 
Alternatively he could've looped and count the 0's.
Just don't use Guid.Empty. I heard it's bugged 
It's an OO world.
public class SanderRossel : Lazy<Person>
{
public void DoWork()
{
throw new NotSupportedException();
}
}
|
|
|
|
|
What if it has lower-case zeroes?
You'll never get very far if all you do is follow instructions.
|
|
|
|
|
You mean they aren't the letter O?
It's an OO world.
public class SanderRossel : Lazy<Person>
{
public void DoWork()
{
throw new NotSupportedException();
}
}
|
|
|
|
|
Sander Rossel wrote: I heard it's bugged
You heard right - it's not even slightly unique.
Those who fail to learn history are doomed to repeat it. --- George Santayana (December 16, 1863 – September 26, 1952)
Those who fail to clear history are doomed to explain it. --- OriginalGriff (February 24, 1959 – ∞)
|
|
|
|
|
Isn't a non-unique GUID pretty unique
It's an OO world.
public class SanderRossel : Lazy<Person>
{
public void DoWork()
{
throw new NotSupportedException();
}
}
|
|
|
|
|
Pretty much the same argument as that for "there are no uninteresting numbers". 
"If there are uninteresting numbers, there must be a first uninteresting number, and that number would therefore be pretty interesting."
You'll never get very far if all you do is follow instructions.
|
|
|
|
|
Why doesn't he just generate the same guid again and compare?
|
|
|
|
|
Exactly. Ought to be
Guid invalid = Guid.Empty();
if (userQueryID.ToString().ToUpper() != invalid.ToString().ToUpper());return null; Oops;! Happened to add another feature...
|
|
|
|
|
Is the errant semi-colon on purpose? 
You'll never get very far if all you do is follow instructions.
|
|
|
|
|
Don't fix that! Other places using that function meanwhile rely on its "feature" that it returns a *special* list for Guid.Empty()!
|
|
|
|
|
Bernhard Hiller wrote: it returns a *special* list for Guid.Empty()!
It's expected to, but does it?
You'll never get very far if all you do is follow instructions.
|
|
|
|
|
IIRC guid's are value not reference types so they can't be empty. Doesn't it have hasValue() method or some such?
|
|
|
|
|
They can't be null, but they can be empty, which is the guid equivalent of zero.
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/system.guid.empty.aspx[^]
There's no HasValue property or method; you just need to test whether it's equal to Guid.Empty.
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
Richard Deeming wrote: you just need to test whether it's equal to Guid.Empty
Except for that you probably don't actually need to.
Edit:
I'm also suspicious as to whether or not they're actually using System.Guid. The snippet doesn't specify, so it's possible that they rolled their own Guid class and then all bets are off.
You'll never get very far if all you do is follow instructions.
modified 27-Jun-14 10:41am.
|
|
|
|
|
Well, you do if you want to know whether or not it's empty. 
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
Except you probably don't actually need to.
You'll never get very far if all you do is follow instructions.
|
|
|
|
|
Google for 'Index Of' instead of 'IndexOf'.
Those are some strange images in the results. (click) NSFW!!!
What the ____?
|
|
|
|
|
I am not sure how to handle that Exception.
Simon Lee Shugar (Software Developer)
www.simonshugar.co.uk
"If something goes by a false name, would it mean that thing is fake? False by nature?" By Gilbert Durandil
|
|
|
|
|
And if you Google 'Parent Directory' you get a different set of similar pictures.
.
|
|
|
|
|
Looks like "parental control" failed in those cases.
|
|
|
|
|
No. It means "get me the contents of the directory meant only for parents"
|
|
|
|
|
Someone's left "directory browsing" turned on for their - ahem - "gentlemen's special-interest" site? 
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
If only I had know what NSFW meant before I tried this... thanks for that 
|
|
|
|
|
Newb!
You could have just typed "define NSFW" into Google and found out!
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
