 |
|
I'm re-writing a legacy ASP application. There's an expensive call to an external webservice and a database to determine a calculated setting specific to the person logged in.
On the first page this calculation is done and the result is stored in a session variable.
On every subsequent page the session variable is ignore, the value is recalculated and then stored in the session variable again!
Some days I don't know if to laugh or cry.
|
|
|
|
|
Sometimes, you just want to go into a code review with a baseball bat and a spiked glove... 
The universe is composed of electrons, neutrons, protons and......morons. (ThePhantomUpvoter)
|
|
|
|
|
Our finance folks were a bit annoyed by one of our web pages, where it occasionally rounded the final total to the nearest dime. While troubleshooting a former colleague's JavaScript code that added 2% to the amount entered by the user, I found this gem. His intention, at least, was obvious by the function name.
function CurrencyFormatted(amount) {
var i = parseFloat(amount);
if (isNaN(i)) { i = 0.00; }
var minus = '';
if (i < 0) { minus = '-'; }
i = Math.abs(i);
i = parseInt((i + .005) * 100);
i = i / 100;
s = new String(i);
if (s.indexOf('.') < 0) { s += '.00'; }
if (s.indexOf('.') == (s.length - 2)) { s += '0'; }
s = minus + s;
return s;
}
Isn't that brilliant? I mean, why use the simple, single-line solution isFixed(2) when you can do the same thing in 9 lines? 
If you think 'goto' is evil, try writing an Assembly program without JMP.
modified yesterday.
|
|
|
|
|
Perhaps he didn't know isFixed exists
.-.
|o,o|
,| _\=/_ .-""-.
||/_/_\_\ /[] _ _\
|_/|(_)|\\ _|_o_LII|_
\._. |\_/|"` |_| ==== |_|
|_|_| ||" || ||
|-|-| ||LI o ||
|_|_| ||'----'||
/_/ \_\ /__| |__\
|
|
|
|
|
Well, perhaps toFixed doesn't work the way he wanted?
Does it handle NaN?
Does it do rounding?
Does it round the absolute value of the value (which would always round up, right?)
Goofing around with the W3School's Try It[^] feature (snazzy) I think everything works correctly except the NaN handling.
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
Marc Clifton wrote: Does it handle NaN?
I don't think NaN will ever arise while currency formatting (going as per method name), without exceptions. He's not doing tan 90 anywhere is he?
|
|
|
|
|
GregorianCalendar date = new GregorianCalendar(1888, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0);
SimpleDateFormat sdf = new SimpleDateFormat("YYYY");
String convertedstring = sdf.format(date.getTime());
System.out.println(convertedstring);
output: 1887 (on my laptop anayway)
GregorianCalendar date = new GregorianCalendar(1888, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0);
SimpleDateFormat sdf = new SimpleDateFormat("yyyy");
String convertedstring = sdf.format(date.getTime());
System.out.println(convertedstring);
output: 1888
For those who didn't notice, in sample 1 I put "YYYY", in sample 2 "yyyy".
I couldn’t immediately find something in the docs or google explaining this…
|
|
|
|
|
"YYYY" means week years.
Quote: A week year is in sync with a WEEK_OF_YEAR cycle. All weeks between the first and last weeks (inclusive) have the same week year value. Therefore, the first and last days of a week year may have different calendar year values.
For example, January 1, 1998 is a Thursday. If getFirstDayOfWeek() is MONDAY and getMinimalDaysInFirstWeek() is 4 (ISO 8601 standard compatible setting), then week 1 of 1998 starts on December 29, 1997, and ends on January 4, 1998. The week year is 1998 for the last three days of calendar year 1997. If, however, getFirstDayOfWeek() is SUNDAY, then week 1 of 1998 starts on January 4, 1998, and ends on January 10, 1998; the first three days of 1998 then are part of week 53 of 1997 and their week year is 1997
SimpleDateFormat[^]
GregorianCalendar[^]
|
|
|
|
|
Quite odd, that is.
Gryphons Are Awesome! Gryphons Are Awesome!
|
|
|
|
|
Unfortunately, many human systems for dealing with dates are odd, all computers can do is reflect that.
"If you don't fail at least 90 percent of the time, you're not aiming high enough."
Alan Kay.
|
|
|
|
|
Message Automatically Removed
|
|
|
|
|
An application that presents it's UI in html5 and runs in a browser as a regular webpage. Leveraging html5 technoligies, it can do pretty much the same thing that a standard user level application does... Like a word processor. Anyways Let me google that for you![^]
But don't tell about a disk defragmanter HTML5 App!
You're new, please read the announcement at the top, this ain't the right place for asking questions...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Draw.IO[^]
Remember...
Post your Best, your worst, and your most interesting. But please - no programming questions . This forum is purely for amusement and discussions on code snippets.
|
|
|
|
|
OK... But I have more questions about this topic...
What should I do
-Toywarrior
|
|
|
|
|
We've got programming forums here in CP, see Discussions > Web Developments
|
|
|
|
|
Will You Join me There????
-Toywarrior
|
|
|
|
|
If you post then... if I get you 
|
|
|
|
|
Looks like you've pulled 
|
|
|
|
|
He was a first timer... little lax was on my part
|
|
|
|
|
I can beat that - I discovered a bug where new records were failing to be added.
After a number of false trails, I homed in on the following SQL user function:
ALTER function [dbo].[ufn_GetNextID](@IDTable as varchar(100), @IDColumn as varchar(100))
returns integer
as
begin
declare @NewID as integer
set @NewID=0
return @NewID
end
"If you don't fail at least 90 percent of the time, you're not aiming high enough."
Alan Kay.
|
|
|
|
|
Gryphons Are Awesome! Gryphons Are Awesome!
|
|
|
|
|
I don't see anything wrong there, what does "0" mean anyway?
|
|
|
|
|
richcb wrote: what does "0" mean anyway?
I believe its the shape of my mouth every time I come across examples like this!
"If you don't fail at least 90 percent of the time, you're not aiming high enough."
Alan Kay.
|
|
|
|
|
Nice, that had me rollin for a minute!
|
|
|
|
|
if(SomeThing == SomeOtherThing);
{
DoSomeThing;
}
This one has been sitting in the codebase for a couple of years... 
At least it did SomeThing...
|
|
|
|
|
Which language? The C# compiler will give you a warning for that: "Possible mistaken empty statement".
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
Even C back in the old days gave you a warning for that.
|
|
|
|
|
Wich compiler ?
while (*dest++ = *source++);
is completely correct, isn't it ?
|
|
|
|
|
It's a warning, not an error, for that reason. This was back when I used Zortech's ANSI C compiler.
|
|
|
|
|
Klaus-Werner Konrad wrote: Wich compiler?
FTFY: Witch compiler
Actually, in this case the C# produces three useless wormings: both for the "while(...);" (an empty statment), "x=y" (an assigment instead of a comparison) and the "*" (an "unsafe" code), does it?
Greetings - Jacek
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks for the correction.
My example was - as a reply to the mention of C, of course a C code snippet,
and is the full working function body for strcpy().
Of course, it's unsafe - but lightning fast
|
|
|
|
|
Just in case you didn't get the joke there, he's making a funny about the compiler being witchcraft. The word you meant to use is 'which'.
|
|
|
|
|
They're not useless warnings, they're warning you that you did something unintended. Actually this wouldn't compile at all in C#, even with unsafe mode turned on, because the result type isn't boolean. It's a classic and well known piece of C code, and I think you only got a warning for the empty loop body (and if you did if(a = 3) by accident you were just screwed, hence writing if(3 == a) instead which is an error if you screw it up).
|
|
|
|
|
Right. 
Greetings - Jacek
|
|
|
|
|
Does that even compile?
/ravi
|
|
|
|
|
No, it doesn't. But that's just the bug: it doesn't compile!
[EDIT]
I'm sorry, I didn't see the semicolon after the if statement. That's the bug!
modified 3 days ago.
|
|
|
|
|
It seems that problem is in semicolon after "if" statement.
DoSomeThing will be fired any time the code executes.
|
|
|
|
|
anton_l wrote: It seems that problem is in semicolon after "if" statement.
It seems that's the reason he posted it!
|
|
|
|
|
This is one of the dangers of C syntax (and friends). That's the price you pay for willing conciseness. Block-only statements like VB's
If Condition Then
Statement
End If
or Modula's
IF Condition THEN
Statement
END
are safer.
|
|
|
|
|
Or Pascal:if condition then
begin
DoStuff();
end
else
begin
DoOtherStuff();
end; Sort an 'are you sure?' prompt for every single conditional. 
Software Zen: delete this;
|
|
|
|
|
Can't you do if condition then one-statement else other-statement though if you don't need a block?
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, but I've always hated doing those, unless you write it on a single line:if condition then DoSomething() else DoOtherThing(); That's the only way in my mind to avoid stupid mistakes like this:if condition then
DoThing1();
DoThing2();
DoThing3();
MainStuff();DoThing2() and DoThing3() look like they're part of the if, but they're not. I do the same thing in C-style languages. If an if-statement occupies more than one line, it gets braced.
Software Zen: delete this;
|
|
|
|
|
I agree and would always put that on a single line.
|
|
|
|
|
Quote: If an if-statement occupies more than one line, it gets braced.
Maybe I'm naïve, but I thought everybody did that!
|
|
|
|
|
I've worked with people who did this:if condition
DoSomething();
else
{
DoOtherThing1();
DoOtherThing2();
}orif condition
{
DoSomething1();
DoSomething2();
}
else
DoOtherThing();Both of which give me the creeping heebie-jeebies.
Software Zen: delete this;
|
|
|
|
|
Gary Wheeler wrote: if condition then
DoThing1();
DoThing2();
DoThing3();
MainStuff();
Yeah that's one of my all-time favorites. It usually starts out like:
if(condition)
DoThing1();
And then someone comes along later and adds DoThing2(), and the compiler silently chuckles to itself and lets the code do a lot of Thing2.
Personally, I like to always use curly braces to block off code for that very reason, even if it's only one statement. If I see something like that with one statement, I'll add the braces so it's clear when someone comes along and changes it.
Putting it all on one line works fine as well, but I like to always create a code block because it makes it easier to add statements later. And really, what's the point of keeping it on one line? But I know a lot of programmers have an irrational fear of vertical space
|
|
|
|
|
Oh no, you misunderstood the guy who wrote that piece of code.
Never did he intend that DoSomeThing() is executed only when some codition is true. He just wanted to make his colleagues (who'll have to maintain his buggy code after he quit his job) believe so.
|
|
|
|
|
Seems like a new style of comment... if you're compiler doesn't support any comments. 
"Program testing can be used to show the presence of bugs, but never to show their absence."
<< please vote!! >>
|
|
|
|
|
I had to read it three times before spotting the problem. Go bugged by the fact that DoSomeThing didn't have parenthesis.
To alcohol! The cause of, and solution to, all of life's problems - Homer Simpson
----
Our heads are round so our thoughts can change direction - Francis Picabia
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
Post your Blog
