|
My 11 year old was addicted when he was younger.
Not sure what that says about them ...
|
|
|
|
|
My twelve-year-old watches that stuff. It's like some sort of mind-altering drug.
You'll never get very far if all you do is follow instructions.
|
|
|
|
|
One has to wonder what TomSka is smoking to come up with some of those things...
e.g. The 'Mine Turtle'. Seriously?
What do you get when you cross a joke with a rhetorical question?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There appears to be some serious disruption in the UK.
ebay.co.uk has been offline since 20:55. Various web monitoring sites confirm this.
theregister.co.uk was also playing up.
Don't know if akamai is having problems again or someone else in the chain.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ta.
Dare say there will be some story about it on elReg soon. 
|
|
|
|
|
Perhaps this[^] is also affecting things on that side of the wet?
TTFN - Kent
|
|
|
|
|
|
I did not know this:
Concatenating a null string is legal[^]
This works:
string s=null;
s+="Hello World";
Oddly (as someone in the link above points out):
int? i = null;
i+=1;
results in i==null.
Interesting stuff. Sort of rubs the fur the wrong way.
(BTW, those that replied to my best practice question, I'll get back to you soon, the responses are awesome!)
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
Seems like string is a special child for microsoft
Tim Toady Bicarbonate
|
|
|
|
|
Or we could make it an option[^] 
It's an OO world.
public class SanderRossel : Lazy<Person>
{
public void DoWork()
{
throw new NotSupportedException();
}
}
|
|
|
|
|
The int? behavior is the expected one. When an int? is null, its int equivalent is 0 (int's default). Since string is a reference type (with some value semantics), you'd expect its default to be null (which is so), but for concatenation they changed it to default to String.Empty. Although it does make sense to do it that way as the most useful behavior (for most or all scenarios).
|
|
|
|
|
Nish Sivakumar wrote: When an int? is null, its int equivalent is 0 (int's default).
Which is why I don't understand why i+=1 != 1 in that case.
Nish Sivakumar wrote: Although it does make sense to do it that way as the most useful behavior
I don't know -- I would think it should throw a null reference exception. Though now that I think about it, I think other places, like in printing to the console, a null string is also handled as an empty string.
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
Marc Clifton wrote: Which is why I don't understand why i+=1 != 1 in that case.
Ah, missed that. Yeah that does seem rather counter-intuitive.
|
|
|
|
|
A string is an array of char.
An empty array has an assigned memory space of the structure of the array with a null stack, adding a char to an array adds the value to the array.
A null int is a variable without a memory space.
|
|
|
|
|
Marc Clifton wrote: Sort of rubs the fur the wrong way.
The thing that rubs me the wrong way in PHP is this...
<?php
for($x=0; $x<10; $x++)
{
$a = $x;
}
echo $a;
?>
Or...
<?php
for($x=0; $x<10; $x++)
{
$aa = $x;
}
echo $a;
?>
Now I like how PHP handles types and variables to make things easy, but ya know this is taking it a bit too far.
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
I've been doing a lot of wordpress work, which I consider a pretty solid product, my wife has a web design firm that I help out with. I think they nailed a CMS API that is really easy and straightforward to customize. HOWEVER, I f$#@$ing hate PHP.
My day job involves a lot of Javascript (and WebForms) and I chose to start using AngularJS, which is a framework that seems to pick the default option that I would have picked which is awesome. PHP picked the opposite direction at every turn, except they have a decent associative array that everyone uses, that is the saving grace.
|
|
|
|
|
Andy Brummer wrote: HOWEVER, I f$#@$ing hate PHP.
Ironically, I think it's a fantastic language. On the web, I'm a total Unix person, so it's Unix-y roots are appealing. It has a TON of functionality. It's fast. And it's dumbed down just enough for most people to use it with relative ease. But sometimes, just sometimes it would be nice to have to declare a variable.
Andy Brummer wrote: and I chose to start using AngularJS
I was looking at that, but still not clear on exactly what it does. I'm assuming it's like jQuery but instead uses it's own DOM right? From what I know it's supposed to be nice to manage client-side state with right?
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
Angular isn't like jQuery. jQuery makes a few things easier and consistent. It adds a few functions that makes many things easier to build.
AngularJS is a complete framework that completely changes the way you write interactive pages. It includes client side templating, 2 way data binding, routing, xhd wrapper, animations through attributes, and a whole host of other features. I normally hate frameworks because they end up making the easy stuff a little easier, and the hard stuff impossible. I haven't run into that with angular.
|
|
|
|
|
I can live with the nullable int example. In my opinion if something starts as a null value then it can only have a new value by a specific assignment.
But then what about this:
int? inotnull = 1;
inotnull += null;
Inotnull ends up as null. Now that is counter intuitive IMHO.
Peter Wasser
"The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts." - Bertrand Russell
|
|
|
|
|
A major difference between the two examples is that you are comparing a number to an array.
A string variable is an array of char, a null array is different then a number without an assigned memory space.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
