reversing the comparison
in [Visual Basic]
|
Prev: Displaying property menu at runtime
Next: Delay Methods
From: Dee Earley on 22 Jul 2010 09:25 On 22/07/2010 13:38, Bob Butler wrote: > > "Tom Shelton" <tom_shelton(a)comcast.invalid> wrote in message > news:i2852b$u82$1(a)news.eternal-september.org... >> Bob Butler used his keyboard to write : >>> "dpb" <none(a)non.net> wrote in message >>> news:i27te9$ul$1(a)news.eternal-september.org... >>> <cut> >>>> I'm w/ Tom in some surprise of even commenting on the use of "bug" >>>> for the problem of a typo causing incorrect behavior in code (in >>>> this case one instead of two "=" signs). Would you not consider a >>>> misspelling of a variable name or the inadvertent use of the wrong >>>> variable or any number of other (more or less) mechanical mistakes >>>> bugs? How would you define a bug vis a vis a "programmer deficiency"? >>> >>> It causes a bug in the application; it's not a bug in the language >>> per se. >> >> No one said it was a bug in the language... > > Then I fail to understand what the question is about calling it a bug. > If somebody codes > if (x=0) { > when they meant to code > if (x==0) { > then they have a bug in the code. Only if it makes it into a build. If the compiler catches it (due to coding standards) then its a syntax error. -- Dee Earley (dee.earley(a)icode.co.uk) i-Catcher Development Team iCode Systems (Replies direct to my email address will be ignored. Please reply to the group.)
From: dpb on 22 Jul 2010 09:30 DanS wrote: >>>>>> It's C++ code.... Older C++ didn't define a bool type >>>>>> or have any concept of a boolean value. That mades >>>>>> these types of comparisons necessary, and the reverse >>>>>> test was to prevent the old bug of accidently doing an >>>>>> assignment in the test. >>> LoopHere: >>> >>>>> Since when is a programmer's own deficiency a bug ? >>>>> >>>> A bug is any incorrect behavior in the program - which in >>>> this old case maybe the result of a typo or as you say, >>>> programmer deficiency. ... .... >> I'm w/ Tom in some surprise of even commenting on the use >> of "bug" for the problem of a typo causing incorrect >> behavior in code (in this case one instead of two "=" >> signs). Would you not consider a misspelling of a variable >> name or the inadvertent use of the wrong variable or any >> number of other (more or less) mechanical mistakes bugs? >> How would you define a bug vis a vis a "programmer >> deficiency"? > > I don't know, I've never thought about it. .... Then what made you react w/ "programmer deficiency" instead of "bug" earlier???? <VBG, D&R> :) --
From: Tom Shelton on 22 Jul 2010 09:43 Bob Butler laid this down on his screen : > "Tom Shelton" <tom_shelton(a)comcast.invalid> wrote in message > news:i2852b$u82$1(a)news.eternal-september.org... >> Bob Butler used his keyboard to write : >>> "dpb" <none(a)non.net> wrote in message >>> news:i27te9$ul$1(a)news.eternal-september.org... >>> <cut> >>>> I'm w/ Tom in some surprise of even commenting on the use of "bug" for >>>> the problem of a typo causing incorrect behavior in code (in this case >>>> one instead of two "=" signs). Would you not consider a misspelling of a >>>> variable name or the inadvertent use of the wrong variable or any number >>>> of other (more or less) mechanical mistakes bugs? How would you define a >>>> bug vis a vis a "programmer deficiency"? >>> >>> It causes a bug in the application; it's not a bug in the language per se. >> >> No one said it was a bug in the language... > > Then I fail to understand what the question is about calling it a bug. Me neither... > If > somebody codes > if (x=0) { > when they meant to code > if (x==0) { > then they have a bug in the code. Exactly the point. -- Tom Shelton
From: Paul Clement on 22 Jul 2010 11:15 On Wed, 21 Jul 2010 15:17:39 -0700, Karl E. Peterson <karl(a)exmvps.org> wrote: � > � > � > � > It's still backwards with respect to readability. ;-) � > � > � > � � > � > � > � Only if your screen is infinitely wide, or you just call functions � > with � > � > � very short parameter lists. � > � > � > � > � > � > Or you use line continuation characters. ;-) � > � > � � > � > � Generally, no. They make E&C a bit more troublesome. HTH! � > � > � > � > Works fine for me. :-) � > � � > � You're using a different language, so that's totally irrelevant. � > � > That's what I was trying to tell you. ;-) � � No need! I've known you're totally irrelevent for years! :-) Yeah, apparently only in this group. Wonder why that is? ;-) Paul ~~~~ Microsoft MVP (Visual Basic)
From: Karl E. Peterson on 22 Jul 2010 15:26
Paul Clement explained on 7/22/2010 : > On Wed, 21 Jul 2010 15:17:39 -0700, Karl E. Peterson <karl(a)exmvps.org> wrote: > > � > � > � > � > It's still backwards with respect to readability. ;-) > � > � > � > � > � > � > � > � Only if your screen is infinitely wide, or you just call > functions � > with � > � > � very short parameter lists. > � > � > � > > � > � > � > Or you use line continuation characters. ;-) > � > � > � > � > � > � Generally, no. They make E&C a bit more troublesome. HTH! > � > � > > � > � > Works fine for me. :-) > � > � > � > � You're using a different language, so that's totally irrelevant. > � > > � > That's what I was trying to tell you. ;-) > � > � No need! I've known you're totally irrelevent for years! :-) > > Yeah, apparently only in this group. Wonder why that is? ;-) I bet you wonder about a lot of things... -- ..NET: It's About Trust! http://vfred.mvps.org |