The Weird and The Wonderful

15-Apr-14 4:56

A RichTextBox has an Rtf property, and a SelectedRtf property.
Even when all text is selected, their values differ.
Just try:

string rtf1 = richTextBox1.Rtf;
richTextBox1.SelectAll();
string rtf2 = richTextBox1.SelectedRtf;
System.Diagnostics.Debug.Assert(rtf1 == rtf2);

ledtech315-Apr-14 5:11

ledtech3

15-Apr-14 5:11

This might explain it.
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/system.windows.forms.richtextbox.rtf(v=vs.110).aspx[^]

Bernhard Hiller15-Apr-14 20:55

15-Apr-14 20:55

No, it does not. By the way, this is the Weird and Wonderful, or Coding Horrors forum - I really intended to place it here, because it is quite a WTF, and I do not expect a sensible answer for it (OK, if you know it, let me here it).
It rather looks like a philisophical design decision: since Rtf is always longer than SelectedRtf, the whole is more than the sum of its parts...

ledtech316-Apr-14 4:28

ledtech3

16-Apr-14 4:28

Try this test to get a better Idea.
Create a test project with a richtextbox and a normal text box.

two buttons and a label to show the length

In VB.net it would look like.

Private Sub Button1_Click(ByVal sender As System.Object, ByVal e As System.EventArgs) Handles Button1.Click
    Dim selLen As Integer

    Dim selectedRtf As String = RichTextBox1.SelectedRtf
    selLen = selectedRtf.Length
    Label1.Text = selLen.ToString
    TextBox1.Text = selectedRtf
End Sub

Private Sub Button2_Click(ByVal sender As System.Object, ByVal e As System.EventArgs) Handles Button2.Click
    Dim selLen As Integer

    Dim selectedRtf As String = RichTextBox1.Rtf
    selLen = selectedRtf.Length
    Label1.Text = selLen.ToString
    TextBox1.Text = selectedRtf
End Sub

Using a converter to convert to C# it would look like this.

private void Button1_Click(System.Object sender, System.EventArgs e)
{
    int selLen = 0;

    string selectedRtf = RichTextBox1.SelectedRtf;
    selLen = selectedRtf.Length;
    Label1.Text = selLen.ToString;
    TextBox1.Text = selectedRtf;
}

private void Button2_Click(System.Object sender, System.EventArgs e)
{
    int selLen = 0;

    string selectedRtf = RichTextBox1.Rtf;
    selLen = selectedRtf.Length;
    Label1.Text = selLen.ToString;
    TextBox1.Text = selectedRtf;
}

Next create some text in wordpad with different formating. Copy paste to the richtextbox (ctl+V)
what this code does is gets the length of the string, the entire string with the hidden formating and copies it to the plain textbox to view all of it.
You can add the line to select all or just select it on the RTF box.

After going back and forth between the buttons you may notice that the second one shows more formatting and thus it is longer.

Rob Grainger16-Apr-14 0:08

Rob Grainger

16-Apr-14 0:08

I'm not certain, but suspect it is due to the fact that an RTF document contains various sections in addition to the formatting codes needed. Here's one version of the spec: RTF 1.7[^] (not the latest, but most should be similar).

A bit like copying HTML to clipboard - if just the markup is copied, other information supplied in the header section may be omitted, so styles etc. wouldn't work correctly. The SelectedText may contain just enough of these for the selection, while the Rtf property will, presumably, include all those in the entire RTF "document" including standard "document level" header sections (a bit like the <head> section in HTML).

"If you don't fail at least 90 percent of the time, you're not aiming high enough."
Alan Kay.

Manikandan1011-Jun-14 3:31

Manikandan10

11-Jun-14 3:31

Agree.

#region

Bernhard Hiller11-Apr-14 2:51

11-Apr-14 2:51

Sometimes I have the impression to work for Augeas[^] Stables Inc, but actually I am expected to produce more dung than to get rid of it...
In the 13395 lines of code of the main window of one of our applications, I found this little gem (really little - only 320 loc) whose functionality I'll need in a new application (a little anonymized):

/// <summary>
/// some description
/// </summary>
private void DoSomething()
{
    ...
    #region do X
    ...
    #endregion

    #region do Y
    ...
    #endregion

    #region do Z
    ...
    #endregion

    #region do A
    ...
    #endregion

    #region do B
    if (some condition)
    {
        #region do C
        ...
        #endregion
    }
    else
    {
        #region do D
        ...
        #endregion
    }
    #endregion
    ...
    #region do E
    try
    {
        switch (some swicth)
        {
            #region do F
            case ...
                break;
            #endregion
            #region do G
            case ...
                break;
            #endregion
            #region do H
            case ...
                break;
            #endregion
            #region do I
            case ...
                break;
            #endregion
        }
        ...
    #endregion
}

Of course with some extra try...catch inside the regions or other try...catch.
Well, at least, it looks like the functionality I need to transfer to the new application is - with the exception of some member variables - in that one single function, and not scattered all over the class... Wink | ;)

"Have you heard of 'Clean Code' by Robert C. Martin? You can download it from the web", said the guy who uses to write such functions.

tgrt11-Apr-14 3:58

tgrt

11-Apr-14 3:58

#region wow
Console.Writeline("Wow!");
#endregion

OriginalGriff11-Apr-14 5:41

OriginalGriff

11-Apr-14 5:41

It's a form of modular code: each module goes in it's own region so you don't get the visual clutter associated with methods... D'Oh! | :doh:

Find a new job! Life is too short...

Those who fail to learn history are doomed to repeat it. --- George Santayana (December 16, 1863 – September 26, 1952)
Those who fail to clear history are doomed to explain it. --- OriginalGriff (February 24, 1959 – ∞)

Bernhard Hiller13-Apr-14 20:40

13-Apr-14 20:40

Why? In order to get experience with even more styles of WTF used in those different places?

OriginalGriff13-Apr-14 21:00

OriginalGriff

13-Apr-14 21:00

So you're saying "better the crap you know"? Laugh | :laugh:

Brisingr Aerowing11-Apr-14 5:46

Brisingr Aerowing

11-Apr-14 5:46

I'm guessing it's a regional issue.

What do you get when you cross a joke with a rhetorical question?

Shameel21-Apr-14 0:57

Shameel

21-Apr-14 0:57

I guess stupidity is not regional, it's universal Big Grin | :-D

BobJanova11-Apr-14 6:51

BobJanova

11-Apr-14 6:51

To write that and then quote Clean Code is a special level of genius!

Richard Andrew x6411-Apr-14 8:29

Richard Andrew x64

11-Apr-14 8:29

If a little of something is good, then a whole lot of it must be better, right?

The difficult we do right away...
...the impossible takes slightly longer.

Sander Rossel24-Apr-14 7:33

Sander Rossel

24-Apr-14 7:33

#endcontract

Giuseppe Tollini24-May-14 1:05

Giuseppe Tollini

24-May-14 1:05

Bernhard Hiller wrote:
In the 13395 lines of code of the main window

Bernhard Hiller wrote:
In the 13395 lines of code

Bernhard Hiller wrote:
13395

What?

Bernhard Hiller29-May-14 20:59

How not to create an instance of a singleton

29-May-14 20:59

That's clean code, isn't it?

Dennis_E10-Apr-14 23:59

Dennis_E

10-Apr-14 23:59

I came across this java code. (I changed the class name to SingletonClass)

Java

private static SingletonClass instance;

public SingletonClass()
{
    SingletonClass.instance = this;
}

public static SingletonClass getInstance()
{
    return instance;
}

Nicholas Marty11-Apr-14 0:25

Nicholas Marty

11-Apr-14 0:25

Singleton... public constructor... I don't see anything wrong here Roll eyes | :rolleyes:

Oh... And I'm curious what you do when you don't call the constructor at least once Laugh | :laugh:

Marc Clifton11-Apr-14 1:40

Marc Clifton

11-Apr-14 1:40

Which of course is used like this:

SingletonClass myVerySingletonClass = (new SingletonClass()).getInstance();

or even better:

SingletonClass anInstanceThatWeDontUse = new SingletoneClass();
SingletonClass useThisInstead = anInstanceThatWeDontUse.getInstance();

Good stuff! Laugh | :laugh:

On the other hand, I actually have written code similar to this, except I don't call it a singleton of course. Granted, it's smelly code.

Quiz: What might be the reason to provide a static method that returns an instance of the class, when you know that there will ever only be one instance?

Marc

Nicholas Marty11-Apr-14 3:16

Nicholas Marty

11-Apr-14 3:16

SingletonClass useThisInstead = anInstanceThatWeDontUse.getInstance();

This would actually generate a compile error as it getInstance() is a static method Poke tongue | ;-P

Marc Clifton11-Apr-14 4:52

Marc Clifton

11-Apr-14 4:52

Nicholas Marty wrote:
This would actually generate a compile error as it getInstance() is a static method

Marc