The Weird and The Wonderful

CDP1802 wrote:

Here and there he uses try and catch, but only to sweep the errors under the rug and go on as if nothing has happened. This man has never heard of OOP and he uses only static methods, probably because he also never heard anything about classes and instances.

CDP1802 wrote:

Please believe me, the whole thing is a chaotic unmaintainable mess.

Stefan_Lang wrote:

Only 9000 lines of switch cases?

0bx wrote:

and I'm not actually calling my variables "Stuff" either

0bx wrote:

it returns the list to be used in an other function

protected void Page_Load(object sender, EventArgs e)
        {
            var Stuff = loadStuff();
        }

private List<Node> loadStuff()
       {
            var Stuff = new List<Node>();
            do
            {
                foreach (Node thing in Node.GetCurrent().Children)
                {
                    Stuff.Add(thing);
                }
                Stuff = ShuffleNodeList(Stuff);
            }
            while (blablabla);
            return Stuff;
       }

protected void Page_Load(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
    List<Node> Stuff = loadStuff();
}

/// Create a list of nodes.
/// Takes the child nodes from the current node and loads at
/// least 100 items into the list.  If there are currently 30 child nodes
/// this will return 120 items in the list.
private List<Node> loadStuff()
{
    List<Node> Stuff = new List<Node>();
    do {
        foreach (Node thing in Node.GetCurrent().Children)
        {
            Stuff.Add(thing);
        }
    } while (Stuff.Count < 100 && Stuff.Count > 0))

    return ShuffleNodeList(Stuff);
}

Chuckle! I think a lot of us do the same, when the occasion arises. I certainly do. Of course, there's no stigma involved in the practice, as long as you remember to test your replacement code thoroughly. Right? Right?

(As it happens, I also do it to my old, already-published fiction...which causes my readers a bit of concern when they discover it! Well, at least with fiction the "debugging" is less onerous.)