|
This would fail if obj is double... 
|
|
|
|
|
In which case you make it
return (double)(int)(double)obj; 
The only instant messaging I do involves my middle finger.
English doesn't borrow from other languages.
English follows other languages down dark alleys, knocks them over and goes through their pockets for loose grammar.
|
|
|
|
|
He likes reinventing the well or doesn't he know Convert.ToDouble()[^]?
I'm brazilian and english (well, human languages in general) aren't my best skill, so, sorry by my english. (if you want we can speak in C# or VB.Net =p)
"Given the chance I'd rather work smart than work hard." - PHS241
"'Sophisticated platform' typically means 'I have no idea how it works.'"
|
|
|
|
|
It should be called TryConvertToDouble with the signature and semantics following the TryXXX functions like TryGetValue(), that is:
It should return bool true on successful conversion, false otherwise and the converted value in the out parameter.
|
|
|
|
|
It shouldn't exist at all.
I'm brazilian and english (well, human languages in general) aren't my best skill, so, sorry by my english. (if you want we can speak in C# or VB.Net =p)
"Given the chance I'd rather work smart than work hard." - PHS241
"'Sophisticated platform' typically means 'I have no idea how it works.'"
|
|
|
|
|
Unboxing cannot do a representation-changing conversion.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Actually, that's designed to convert a string to double, the code in question is designed to convert objects to double - including explicitly ints.
You're not suggesting the way to convert an integer to a double is as follows are you?
1. Convert the int to a string.
2. Convert the string to a double.
"If you don't fail at least 90 percent of the time, you're not aiming high enough."
Alan Kay.
|
|
|
|
|
Here[^].
That is a fail.
Keep Clam And Proofread
--
√(-1) 23 ∑ π...
And it was delicious.
|
|
|
|
|
Indeed, I fail to get it 
~RaGE();
I think words like 'destiny' are a way of trying to find order where none exists. - Christian Graus
Do not feed the troll ! - Common proverb
|
|
|
|
|
Look at the subject line.
Keep Clam And Proofread
--
√(-1) 23 ∑ π...
And it was delicious.
|
|
|
|
|
You forgot to censor your name (unless that is a fake email name). 
|
|
|
|
|
I just found this wonderful tidbit in a .NET app I'm supporting.
TextBox tbRoute = (TextBox)FindControl("ChkRoute" + cnt.ToString());
if ((tbRoute.Text != "") && (tbRoute.Text != "") && (tbRoute.Text != "")) {
...
}
|
|
|
|
|
Ignoring the dubiously-named variable cnt, you must be really sure that the control ChkRouteN exists, since you never test the value returned from FindControl for null. 
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
The cnt is because this was inside a for loop. Perhaps whoever coded it thought the code could lie the first two times you ask if a value is empty, but not a third.
Looking at the HTML I think they meant to find two other controls and add them to the IF statement, but never got around to it. *sigh*
|
|
|
|
|
The sad thing is that he got paid to write that... 
The only instant messaging I do involves my middle finger.
English doesn't borrow from other languages.
English follows other languages down dark alleys, knocks them over and goes through their pockets for loose grammar.
|
|
|
|
|
So....what exactly is wrong with that?
|
|
|
|
|
Did you check that the Text property Getter didn't make changes to the underlying data and so make that a valid statement.
e.g.
private string _text;
public string Text
{
Get{
if (_text == null)
{
_text = "Empty";
return _text;
}
if (_text == "Empty")
_text = "";
return _text;
}
}
MVVM # - I did it My Way
___________________________________________
Man, you're a god. - walterhevedeich 26/05/2011
.\\axxx
(That's an 'M')
modified 9-Oct-13 2:33am.
|
|
|
|
|
_Maxxx_ wrote: if (_text = "Empty")
_text = "";
This will be always be true no matter what _text is  except for F# but there the if else operation contains then 
Microsoft ... the only place where VARIANT_TRUE != true
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks for the human compiler - I've fixed it.
MVVM # - I did it My Way
___________________________________________
Man, you're a god. - walterhevedeich 26/05/2011
.\\axxx
(That's an 'M')
|
|
|
|
|
No it won't. It wouldn't compile...
|
|
|
|
|
It depends on the compiler and the language you are writing in. In c++ it will compile and run and you will be looking for a bug 
Microsoft ... the only place where VARIANT_TRUE != true
|
|
|
|
|
AnalogNerd wrote: if ((tbRoute.Text != "") && (tbRoute.Text != "") && (tbRoute.Text != "")) {
Third time is the charm
|
|
|
|
|
I've unintentionally had that happen after some refactoring. A couple text boxes contained values, and were later converted to a single box. Refactoring the name of the second to be the same as the first created the circumstance found here.
Of course, that situation only lasted for a little while, since I did check all the references to make sure nothing too stupid happened...
Software Zen: delete this;
|
|
|
|
|
At least give the guy credit for ensuring that no variable leaves empty-handed.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
