|
He was just putting the DataTables off to the side in case he needed them later. You never know when you might need a good DataTable again. 
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
|
|
|
|
|
Just a quick one, but amused me when I saw it in code today.
if (i == 0)
return 1;
else
return i + 1;
|
|
|
|
|
What was that coder thinking?
EDIT: Or WAS he/she thinking?
public class SysAdmin : Employee
{
public override void DoWork(IWorkItem workItem)
{
if (workItem.User.Type == UserType.NoLearn){
throw new NoIWillNotFixYourComputerException(new Luser(workItem.User));
}else{
base.DoWork(workItem);
}
}
}
|
|
|
|
|
And let those who have never failed to see the obvious throw the first stone
At least artificial intelligence already is superior to natural stupidity
|
|
|
|
|
public class SysAdmin : Employee
{
public override void DoWork(IWorkItem workItem)
{
if (workItem.User.Type == UserType.NoLearn){
throw new NoIWillNotFixYourComputerException(new Luser(workItem.User));
}else{
base.DoWork(workItem);
}
}
}
|
|
|
|
|
Hey now, maybe it was originally written with constants or enumerations. 
|
|
|
|
|
yeah, sure, increment a enumeration...
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)
|
|
|
|
|
That is funny++.
"You get that on the big jobs."
|
|
|
|
|
Interesting
But i can not imagine the reason of the code. Can you give the full scope of code? Thinking but nothing find about the code
|
|
|
|
|
A nice piece indeed.
Here is a slightly more defensive version that makes sure the sign is properly handled:
if (i < 0)
return 1 - abs(i);
else if (i == 0)
return 1;
else if (i > 0)
return 1 + abs(i);
(with the added benefit that out-of-range values are left unchanged)
modified 19-Jun-12 2:22am.
|
|
|
|
|
return (i < 0) ? (1 - abs(i)) : ((i == 0) ? 1 : 1 + abs(i));
Here. Shorter now, and less obvious to spot. The benefits of multiple ternaries
|
|
|
|
|
Right. This allows us to move the common constant in front and factor out the abs call:
return 1 + abs(i) * ((i < 0) ? - 1 : ((i == 0) ? 0 : + 1));
But how do we make the i > 0 case explicit ???
Maybe
return 1 + abs(i) * ((i < 0) ? - 1 : ((i == 0) ? 0 : ((i > 0) ? + 1 : abort(), 0)));
|
|
|
|
|
And even better, we can abstract away the "1", who knows, maybe its value will change somewhere in the future:
final int _CONST = 1;
return _CONST + abs(i) * ((i < 0) ? - _CONST : ((i == 0) ? 0 : ((i > 0) ? + _CONST : abort(), 0)));
Can I have that mind bleach now, please? 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hey but what about i being sqrt(2)???
|
|
|
|
|
Function will return sqrt(2) + 1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
And for sqrt(-1/64) do we get indigestion tablets?
|
|
|
|
|
ASkoro wrote:
And for sqrt(-2)????
Computers ignore complexity. Or is that irrationality? I'm almost sure that's a complex number. If that is true, what is an irrational number? I know they both exist, but can't definitively define them.
|
|
|
|
|
I just tried your method, and my compiler is generating a error about a method must return a value, so I fixed it.
There is a version without bugs, hope it helps:
if (i < 0)
return 1 - abs(i);
else if (i == 0)
return 1;
else if (i > 0)
return 1 + abs(i);
|
|
|
|
|
Sorry, I fail to see how you fixed it. Computers aren't very good at determining there is an unreachable path. Put an unconditional return 1 - abs(i) + abs(i); after all the if statements should fix it. (Especially if i is uint. Checking for negative numbers is really interesting in that case.)
|
|
|
|
|
Came across this piece of solid-gold coding in Android the other day, in good old SurfaceFlinger.cpp:
if (mCurrentState.orientation != orientation) {
if (uint32_t(orientation)<=eOrientation270 || orientation==42) {
mCurrentState.orientationType = flags;
mCurrentState.orientation = orientation;
setTransactionFlags(eTransactionNeeded);
mTransactionCV.wait(mStateLock);
} else {
orientation = BAD_VALUE;
}
}
Sometimes I just don't know what to think any more. 
+++DIVIDE BY CUCUMBER ERROR+++
|
|
|
|
|
Well, just hold your phone at 42 degrees .
And also, there were worse f'ups: (Steve Jobs "Don't hold it that way", anyone?) Actually, there were none 
|
|
|
|
|
Guess the author is afraid of "AddWithZeroException" 
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
