Making Wrong Code Look Wrong

[iago]

http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/Wrong.html

This is a fantastic article!

I think it's the first thing I read that articulates why operator overriding is a terrible thing.

I also agree with his version of "Hungarian Notation" - as I was reading it, I was thinking "why aren't I doing this?" It could save me a TON of headaches! And I do do it sometimes, but without really thinking about it.

Anybody who is/wants to program should read this complete, despite its length!

[MyndFyre]

He says:

Code: [Select]

char* dest, src;
This is legal code; it may conform to your coding convention, and it may even be what was intended, but when you’ve had enough experience writing C code, you’ll notice that this declares dest as a char pointer while declaring src as merely a char, and even if this might be what you wanted, it probably isn’t. That code smells a little bit dirty.

I thought that this code would declare both dest and src as char*.  What he meant was:

Code: [Select]

char *dest, src;
which would declare dest as char* and src as char.

[iago]

He says:

Code: [Select]

char* dest, src;
This is legal code; it may conform to your coding convention, and it may even be what was intended, but when you’ve had enough experience writing C code, you’ll notice that this declares dest as a char pointer while declaring src as merely a char, and even if this might be what you wanted, it probably isn’t. That code smells a little bit dirty.

I thought that this code would declare both dest and src as char*.  What he meant was:

Code: [Select]

char *dest, src;
which would declare dest as char* and src as char.

Both
char *dest, src;
and
char* dest, src;
are equally right/wrong. They're both syntactically right, but are almost guaranteed to produce the wrong result.

[rabbit]

This is one of the reasons I like to stick my *'s with the variables!  char *dest, src and char* dest, src are the same thing.

[iago]

This is one of the reasons I like to stick my *'s with the variables!  char *dest, src and char* dest, src are the same thing.

For me, it's a reason I don't declare variables on the same line:
char *dest;
char src;

Pretty obvious

That's not the main reason, it's just a personal thing.

[rabbit]

I just think single line declarations of multiple variables just looks ugly :\

[Joe]

He says:

Code: [Select]

char* dest, src;
This is legal code; it may conform to your coding convention, and it may even be what was intended, but when you’ve had enough experience writing C code, you’ll notice that this declares dest as a char pointer while declaring src as merely a char, and even if this might be what you wanted, it probably isn’t. That code smells a little bit dirty.

I thought that this code would declare both dest and src as char*.  What he meant was:

Code: [Select]

char *dest, src;
which would declare dest as char* and src as char.

That's quite similar to something that happened quite often in programming class:

Dim i, j as Integer

i would be a Variant and J would be an Integer, whereas they were both (obviously) intended for Integers.

[Warrior]

I'm with iago, I never declare more than one variable per line. It's just an awkward thing to do, imho.

[Sidoh]

I'm with iago, I never declare more than one variable per line. It's just an awkward thing to do, imho.

Yeah, I agree.  I do it sometimes when the code I'm writing isn't meant to be reused or used for an extended period of time, but if what I'm writing is "serious business," then I declare one per line.  I've seen it cause too many problems.

[MyndFyre]

I'm with iago, I never declare more than one variable per line. It's just an awkward thing to do, imho.

So do your guys' classes that might have 10 member variables of which 8 are the same type have 10 lines?

Code: [Select]

private string m_first;
private string m_last;
private string m_suffix;
private string m_adr1;
private string m_adr2;
private string m_city;
private string m_state;
private string m_zip;
Or:

Code: [Select]

private string m_first, m_last, m_suffix, m_adr1, m_adr2, m_city, m_state, m_zip;

I don't really see how the second is more awkard then the first.

[Warrior]

Yes if I theoretically ever found the need to use 10 strings as members for my class it'd probably look like that.

[cheeseisfun]

Word up. These are good ways to organize your code. Organization is one of the biggest problems in programming. Thanks for posting this article, iago.

[iago]

So do your guys' classes that might have 10 member variables of which 8 are the same type have 10 lines?

Code: [Select]

private string m_first;
private string m_last;
private string m_suffix;
private string m_adr1;
private string m_adr2;
private string m_city;
private string m_state;
private string m_zip;
Or:

Code: [Select]

private string m_first, m_last, m_suffix, m_adr1, m_adr2, m_city, m_state, m_zip;

I don't really see how the second is more awkard then the first.

I would declare them the first way, definitely. But it's a personal thing.

[rabbit]

First way for me as well.

[Chavo]

Same, using vertical space never bothers me, but I almost always go back and change my code if a line is longer than my horizontal page width.

[mynameistmp]

Haha, good read. Anything I ever wrote was always horrible. Try looking at the ncurses code for slackchat (if i recall correctly, the pscr() function to be specific) ;P

[rabbit]

I would, if I could find Slackchat anywhere.

[mynameistmp]

http://www.javaop.com/~tmp/index.htm