|
It has a few humorous properties? 
That said, I'm surprised there were no compiler errors.
UPDATE: I was focused on the missing types on your properties (cut/paste error in posting?). I think it would be a "capital" idea if you fixed those...then, the other issue might be more apparent
modified 13-Nov-18 13:56pm.
|
|
|
|
|
The code presented is perfectly acceptable to the compiler. Resharper will notify you that input parameter value3 is not being used, which I would then have noticed that. I don't know if the latest version of VS2017 shows that too, I think it does.
Also, I think the unused input parameter may also show up as a compiler warning, but could be wrong there, depending on a person's settings, etc.
|
|
|
|
|
I was talking about the missing types on the property declarations. Just updated before I read your reply.
|
|
|
|
|
Eric Lynch wrote: I'm surprised there were no compiler errors.
It is always interesting to me that C# doesn't produce a compiler error for that.
But, I guess it figures you know best. 
Maybe there's a warning, but we all ignore warnings. 
|
|
|
|
|
I think it does issue a warning when you assign something to itself...at least I recall seeing one.
I was more focused on the missing types in the property declarations.
|
|
|
|
|
There is no warning, which surprised me - and I have "treat warnings as errors" set by default ...
Sent from my Amstrad PC 1640
Never throw anything away, Griff
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
There (sort of) is a warning for self-assignment. If you assign
value3 = value3 you do get a warning. If you assign
Value3 = Value3 you do not get a warning.
Strange, the warning must only be for self-assignment of variables, but not properties?
|
|
|
|
|
Not that strange: properties are syntactic sugar for getter and setter methods, so what you are actually doing is:
Value3 = Value3;
==
Value3_setter(Value3_getter()); But the compiler should have spotted it:: lazy programmers strike again ... 
Sent from my Amstrad PC 1640
Never throw anything away, Griff
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah, in their defense, I guess there are cases where that "self-assignment" might actually have "desired" side effects (such as modifying some other local variable). Though, I'd still like it if the compiler kicked out a low level warning...mostly, because I'm bound to make that mistake myself sometime 
|
|
|
|
|
It often issues warnings when there is also an error. Otherwise you're on your own...
We're philosophical about power outages here. A.C. come, A.C. go.
|
|
|
|
|
I have had a number of cases where Visual Studio suggests that I should make a variable readonly, for reasons somewhat similar to this one (and I have had similar problems spotting it).
That is when there is only a single assignment to the one variant of the name - it is not smart enough to detect that I have declared two differently named variables for the same "real world" value, using one name in half of the statements, the ohter one in the other half. I wish it was that smart  (I can think of only one time this happened, though.)
|
|
|
|
|
Ugh. Uppercase vs Lowercase errors always drive me crazy!!!
|
|
|
|
|
That's why I only write programs in BASIC and Pascal.
Well, sometimes I get modren and use FORTRAN. 
|
|
|
|
|
you misspelled value3.
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013
|
|
|
|
|
You forgot to capitalize the first letter of your sentence.
|
|
|
|
|
that's okay, because my sentence is not part of any widely recognized API...
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013
|
|
|
|
|
You under-estimate your importance, IJSOP.
Software Zen: delete this;
|
|
|
|
|
My vote is NOT ENOUGH coffee.
|
|
|
|
|
In c++ you will get at least a warning "Parameter value3" not used  
It does not solve my Problem, but it answers my question
modified 19-Jan-21 21:04pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Maunder wrote: Why is MyObject.Value3 always equal to 0?
Because your code is doing what you told it to do - not what you want it to do?
(That is usually my problem with my code!)
Socialism is the Axe Body Spray of political ideologies: It never does what it claims to do, but people too young to know better keep buying it anyway. (Glenn Reynolds)
|
|
|
|
|
The programmer's lament:
I really hate this damn machine -
I wish that they would sell it.
It doesnt't do the thing I want,
but only what I tell it!
(source unknown)
|
|
|
|
|
|
All languages have their stupid parts, this is in my opinion one of the major ones of the languages deriving from C.
|
|
|
|
|
Unfortunately that happens, and aging doesn't help.
Interestingly enough, in spite of 0x01AA remark, g++ doesn't complain about
class Foo
{
int F;
public:
Foo(int f){F = F;}
But it does complain about (which is, by the way, the construct every sensible C++ developer would have chosen)
class Foo
{
int F;
public:
Foo(int f):F(F){}
spitting out a sane
warning: ‘Foo::F’ is initialized with itself
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
