reversing the comparison
Kevin Provance
If (FALSE == SomeFunction())
{
...
}
Why put FALSE == instead of the function first, like we usually do?
--
Customer Hatred Knows No Bounds at MSFT
Free usenet access at http://www.eternal-september.org
ClassicVB Users Regroup! comp.lang.basic.visual.misc
Bawwk! Paulie want a dingleball, bawwk!
dpb
> Hey C++ guys, what is the advantage or purpose of this?
>
> If (FALSE == SomeFunction())
> {
> ...
> }
>
> Why put FALSE == instead of the function first, like we usually do?
It's defensive coding style advocated by some--if accidently write w/
only one "=" the non-assignable lhs will trigger compilation error.
AFAIK that's the only purpose (but I'm no C/C++ guru, I've just seen it
as one of the suggestions in Dan Saks columns amongst other places iirc).
--
Karl E. Peterson
> Hey C++ guys, what is the advantage or purpose of this?
>
> If (FALSE == SomeFunction())
> {
> ...
> }
>
> Why put FALSE == instead of the function first, like we usually do?
I've done that, occassionally, because so often you're testing for Not
False, and just omit the test altogether. And, if it's a really long
function call, the test may hang off the end of the window. So, to me,
these are the typical choices:
If SomeFunction() Then
or:
If SomeFunction() = False Then
But what if the function has eight or nine parameters, and you end up
with:
If SomeFunction(Byval aLongVarName, ByVal SomeMoreData, ByVal Blah,
By<clipped>
Are you testing for true or false? If you put the False up front, it's
really clear when you make an exception to the normal situation.
--
.NET: It's About Trust!
http://vfred.mvps.org
Kevin Provance
"Karl E. Peterson" <ka...@exmvps.org> wrote in message
news:i22va8$qjs$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
:
: Are you testing for true or false? If you put the False up front, it's
: really clear when you make an exception to the normal situation.
I'm converting some C++ code to VB (specifically dealing with CAB files) and
I noticed the call was...reversed. I was just curious if there was a
specific reason why. Tis all. :-)
Cor
"Kevin Provance" <k@p.c> wrote in message
news:i22u46$i8d$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
Dee Earley
> But what if the function has eight or nine parameters, and you end up with:
>
> If SomeFunction(Byval aLongVarName, ByVal SomeMoreData, ByVal Blah,
> By<clipped>
>
> Are you testing for true or false? If you put the False up front, it's
> really clear when you make an exception to the normal situation.
I'd use:
If Not SomeFunction(...
On looking through my own project, the only occurance of "If blah =
False" is your FindWindowList module :)
--
Dee Earley (dee.e...@icode.co.uk)
i-Catcher Development Team
iCode Systems
(Replies direct to my email address will be ignored.
Please reply to the group.)
dpb
...
> I'm converting some C++ code to VB (specifically dealing with CAB files) and
> I noticed the call was...reversed. I was just curious if there was a
> specific reason why. Tis all. :-)
I'd still wager the particular piece of code was written after its
author had just been indoctrinated in a defensive programming training
session or read the latest issue of one of the "C/C++ pitfalls"
columns... :)
--
dpb
And, of course, unless there's a specific reason to be testing
specifically for the FALSE case it's silly affectation to write anything
other than
if( !SomeFunc() ) { ...
anyway, in which case the possibility of an assignment by the "normal"
order in the case of the missing symbol doesn't appear.
I looked for the column but didn't find it quickly; the link to the
archived Embedded Systems Programming columns was/is broken and the
subsequent pages to the earlier ones after the first 10 all have the
same 10 columns linked to which didn't happen to include the one in
question. I have all the paper issues but not a generic index and it's
long enough ago I'm thinking I'll not be leafing thru to try to find it
that way any time soon... :)
--
Jeff Johnson
news:i22ukn$oev$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
This is the explanation I've always heard, too.
Paul Clement
¤ Hey C++ guys, what is the advantage or purpose of this?
¤
¤ If (FALSE == SomeFunction())
¤ {
¤ ...
¤ }
¤
¤ Why put FALSE == instead of the function first, like we usually do?
Looks like the Yoda School of Programming to me. Coded properly, the comparison to FALSE isn't even
necessary.
Paul
~~~~
Microsoft MVP (Visual Basic)
Tom Shelton
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.
--
Tom Shelton
DanS
>> usually do?
>>
>> Looks like the Yoda School of Programming to me. Coded
>> properly, the comparison to FALSE isn't even necessary.
>>
>
> 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.
Since when is a programmer's own deficiency a bug ?
I've made that error in C, and never blamed anyone but myself.
Tom Shelton
>>> ¤ Why put FALSE == instead of the function first, like we
>>> usually do?
>>>
>>> Looks like the Yoda School of Programming to me. Coded
>>> properly, the comparison to FALSE isn't even necessary.
>>>
>>
>> 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.
>
> 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. What
does this actualy have to do with my response?
> I've made that error in C, and never blamed anyone but myself.
As have I. The idea of the reverse test, and why it is actually a
common C/C++ idiom is because it helps prevent bugs. It's called
defensive coding... It turns a simple typo into a compilation error.
More modern languages usually design there conditional statements to
only work on boolean type values - so an accidental assignment is
always caught by the compiler.
--
Tom Shelton
Karl E. Peterson
Heh, actually, that question was directed at the code snippet that you
snipped. <g> Rewinding...
"Karl E. Peterson" <ka...@exmvps.org> wrote in message
> But what if the function has eight or nine parameters, and you end up with:
>
> If SomeFunction(Byval aLongVarName, ByVal SomeMoreData, ByVal Blah,
> By<clipped>
>
> Are you testing for true or false? If you put the False up front, it's
> really clear when you make an exception to the normal situation.
The <clipped> there was supposed to represent the right-edge of the
code window. IOW, you are unable to read the entire line of code,
because it's wider than your window.
In *most* cases, you'd simply be testing for a non-zero (true) return,
so there'd be no need to read it all. But what if you want to test for
a 0 (false) return?
If you put the =0 or =False at the end of the line, it could easily be
out of view and not intuitively noticeable. That would be a
justification for putting this less common test up front, IMO.
YMMV, of course. :-)
Karl E. Peterson
> On 20/07/2010 02:48, Karl E. Peterson wrote:
>> But what if the function has eight or nine parameters, and you end up with:
>>
>> If SomeFunction(Byval aLongVarName, ByVal SomeMoreData, ByVal Blah,
>> By<clipped>
>>
>> Are you testing for true or false? If you put the False up front, it's
>> really clear when you make an exception to the normal situation.
>
> I'd use:
> If Not SomeFunction(...
What if SomeFunction returns 1 on success? Your test will only "work"
if SomeFunction returns CLng(True). That might be a reasonable
approach with VB-authored functions, but will crap out quickly with API
calls.
Paul Clement
¤ Paul Clement was thinking very hard :
So let me get this straight...
"If (FALSE)" in C++ evaluates to True or is it an invalid statement? I haven't work with an older
C-language in over 25 years so I can't recall how this functions.
It's still backwards with respect to readability. ;-)
Tom Shelton
> On Tue, 20 Jul 2010 09:02:19 -0600, Tom Shelton <tom_s...@comcast.invalid>
> wrote:
>
> ¤ Paul Clement was thinking very hard :
> ¤ > On Mon, 19 Jul 2010 21:28:37 -0400, "Kevin Provance" <k@p.c> wrote:
> ¤ >
> ¤ > ¤ Hey C++ guys, what is the advantage or purpose of this?
> ¤ > ¤
> ¤ > ¤ If (FALSE == SomeFunction())
> ¤ > ¤ {
> ¤ > ¤ ...
> ¤ > ¤ }
> ¤ > ¤
> ¤ > ¤ Why put FALSE == instead of the function first, like we usually do?
> ¤ >
> ¤ > Looks like the Yoda School of Programming to me. Coded properly, the
> ¤ > comparison to FALSE isn't even necessary.
> ¤ >
> ¤
> ¤ 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.
>
> So let me get this straight...
>
> "If (FALSE)" in C++ evaluates to True or is it an invalid statement?
FALSE is not a C/C++ keyword. Most likely, someone has used a #define
to equate FALSE with 0.
#define FALSE 0
Remember, in C/C++ - false = 0, true is non-zero.
> I
> haven't work with an older C-language in over 25 years so I can't recall how
> this functions.
>
> It's still backwards with respect to readability. ;-)
It is - but, with respect to code saftey, it makes a lot of sense.
--
Tom Shelton
dpb
It relies on SomeFunction() being a properly-behaved logical function.
Under that restriction it is reliable.
Unfortunately, as you note, many MS API functions do not follow that
nicety but do return numeric results instead of language-Standard
defined TRUE/FALSE. This of course results in problems and is an
unfortunate result of the "anything but 0 is true" of K&R C that led to
the shortcuts. It is seen in a lot of C code as well as just Win APIs
so one always has to be aware of what the actual return values are from
any function one is translating.
--
Karl E. Peterson
Only if your screen is infinitely wide, or you just call functions with
very short parameter lists.
Karl E. Peterson
> Karl E. Peterson wrote:
>> Dee Earley formulated on Tuesday :
>>> On 20/07/2010 02:48, Karl E. Peterson wrote:
>>>> But what if the function has eight or nine parameters, and you end up
>>>> with:
>>>>
>>>> If SomeFunction(Byval aLongVarName, ByVal SomeMoreData, ByVal Blah,
>>>> By<clipped>
>>>>
>>>> Are you testing for true or false? If you put the False up front, it's
>>>> really clear when you make an exception to the normal situation.
>>>
>>> I'd use:
>>> If Not SomeFunction(...
>>
>> What if SomeFunction returns 1 on success? Your test will only "work" if
>> SomeFunction returns CLng(True). That might be a reasonable approach with
>> VB-authored functions, but will crap out quickly with API calls.
>
> It relies on SomeFunction() being a properly-behaved logical function. Under
> that restriction it is reliable.
So in that respect, it is a language dependent construct.
> Unfortunately, as you note, many MS API functions do not follow that nicety
> but do return numeric results instead of language-Standard defined
> TRUE/FALSE.
Right. Most define success as non-zero. And I do use "most" as a very
important qualifier, there.
> This of course results in problems and is an unfortunate result
> of the "anything but 0 is true" of K&R C that led to the shortcuts. It is
> seen in a lot of C code as well as just Win APIs so one always has to be
> aware of what the actual return values are from any function one is
> translating.
Yep.
Paul Clement
¤ > 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. ;-)
Paul Clement
¤ > ¤ > Looks like the Yoda School of Programming to me. Coded properly, the
¤ > ¤ > comparison to FALSE isn't even necessary.
¤ > ¤ >
¤ > ¤
¤ > ¤ 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.
¤ >
¤ > So let me get this straight...
¤ >
¤ > "If (FALSE)" in C++ evaluates to True or is it an invalid statement?
¤
¤ FALSE is not a C/C++ keyword. Most likely, someone has used a #define
¤ to equate FALSE with 0.
¤
¤ #define FALSE 0
¤
¤ Remember, in C/C++ - false = 0, true is non-zero.
I try to remember as little as possible about the C language, although I do still have my first
edition Kernighan and Ritchie book.
¤ > I
¤ > haven't work with an older C-language in over 25 years so I can't recall how
¤ > this functions.
¤ >
¤ > It's still backwards with respect to readability. ;-)
¤
¤ It is - but, with respect to code saftey, it makes a lot of sense.
I guess you have to be a C-programmer. ;-) Thanks for the info.
dpb
...
> "If (FALSE)" in C++ evaluates to True or is it an invalid statement? ...
Neither...
As noted by somebody else, C++ initially (I don't know about latest
Standard) didn't have a Boolean intrinsic type and used the C convention
of any nonzero value is TRUE/0 is FALSE.
The statement was FALSE==function() which is true
But, the logical NOT operator, "!" as opposed to the bitwise NOT "~"
turns any nonzero value to zero and zero to 1.
So, !FALSE == TRUE
--
Tom Shelton
> Paul Clement wrote:
> ...
>> "If (FALSE)" in C++ evaluates to True or is it an invalid statement? ...
>
> Neither...
>
> As noted by somebody else, C++ initially (I don't know about latest Standard)
> didn't have a Boolean intrinsic type and used the C convention of any nonzero
> value is TRUE/0 is FALSE.
>
C++ does define a true boolean now. But, the old convention seems to
be still alive as far as I can tell.
--
Tom Shelton
Tom Shelton
> On Tue, 20 Jul 2010 11:48:47 -0600, Tom Shelton <tom_s...@comcast.invalid>
> wrote:
>
> ¤ > ¤ > Looks like the Yoda School of Programming to me. Coded properly, the
> ¤ > ¤ > comparison to FALSE isn't even necessary.
> ¤ > ¤ >
> ¤ > ¤
> ¤ > ¤ 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.
> ¤ >
> ¤ > So let me get this straight...
> ¤ >
> ¤ > "If (FALSE)" in C++ evaluates to True or is it an invalid statement?
> ¤
> ¤ FALSE is not a C/C++ keyword. Most likely, someone has used a #define
> ¤ to equate FALSE with 0.
> ¤
> ¤ #define FALSE 0
> ¤
> ¤ Remember, in C/C++ - false = 0, true is non-zero.
>
> I try to remember as little as possible about the C language, although I do
> still have my first edition Kernighan and Ritchie book.
Ah... K & R C :)
function(x) : int {
return x;
}
Fun stuff that :) I can't remember if the above is completely accurate
to the original C - but, in my first job I had to work with some old C
code written on some old motorola unix sysstems... So, I got to play
quite a bit with some of the old style K&R stuff - but that was almost
10 years ago now :)
--
Tom Shelton
dpb
> dpb brought next idea :
>> Karl E. Peterson wrote:
>>> Dee Earley formulated on Tuesday :
>>>> On 20/07/2010 02:48, Karl E. Peterson wrote:
>>>>> But what if the function has eight or nine parameters, and you end
>>>>> up with:
>>>>>
>>>>> If SomeFunction(Byval aLongVarName, ByVal SomeMoreData, ByVal Blah,
>>>>> By<clipped>
>>>>>
>>>>> Are you testing for true or false? If you put the False up front, it's
>>>>> really clear when you make an exception to the normal situation.
>>>>
>>>> I'd use:
>>>> If Not SomeFunction(...
>>>
>>> What if SomeFunction returns 1 on success? Your test will only
>>> "work" if SomeFunction returns CLng(True). That might be a
>>> reasonable approach with VB-authored functions, but will crap out
>>> quickly with API calls.
>>
>> It relies on SomeFunction() being a properly-behaved logical function.
>> Under that restriction it is reliable.
>
> So in that respect, it is a language dependent construct.
Yes, but within any language (at least any I'm aware of) it is
self-consistent. The problems really begin when translating from one
language to another where the definitions while self-consistent may not
be consistent between languages.
>> Unfortunately, as you note, many MS API functions do not follow that
>> nicety but do return numeric results instead of language-Standard
>> defined TRUE/FALSE.
>
> Right. Most define success as non-zero. And I do use "most" as a very
> important qualifier, there.
>
>> This of course results in problems and is an unfortunate result of the
>> "anything but 0 is true" of K&R C that led to the shortcuts. It is
>> seen in a lot of C code as well as just Win APIs so one always has to
>> be aware of what the actual return values are from any function one is
>> translating.
>
> Yep.
Just for completeness of anybody finding this...
Actually, I had forgotten for certain the C-defined behavior for logical
NOT ("!") so went to refresh memory. It is internally self-consistent
in turning any nonzero value to zero as opposed to a bitwise NOT ("~").
Where you can really get knickers wrapped up is !function() in C
translated to VB where the only NOT operator is Not which is a bitwise
operator the equivalent of C/C++ ~. A straightforward translation of
if(!cFunction()) { ...
to
If(Not same_cFunctionResult()) Then
will only have the same results if the function has 0|1 as its only
outputs which is a fair rarity in the C world (and definitely so in the
Win32 API subset of that world) as noted.
--
dpb
I don't think there are enough silver bullets or wooden stakes to ever
slay that particular creature...it is an idiom/convention too ingrained
into C/C++ vernacular to ever die. And, afaik, TRUE is still equated to
nonzero not only to the value of the _one_true_TRUE_ (tm) and will have
to remain because otherwise it breaks almost every C/C++ code in existence.
--
Karl E. Peterson
> Karl E. Peterson wrote:
>> dpb brought next idea :
>>> Karl E. Peterson wrote:
>>>> Dee Earley formulated on Tuesday :
>>>>> On 20/07/2010 02:48, Karl E. Peterson wrote:
>>>>>> But what if the function has eight or nine parameters, and you end up
>>>>>> with:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If SomeFunction(Byval aLongVarName, ByVal SomeMoreData, ByVal Blah,
>>>>>> By<clipped>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Are you testing for true or false? If you put the False up front, it's
>>>>>> really clear when you make an exception to the normal situation.
>>>>>
>>>>> I'd use:
>>>>> If Not SomeFunction(...
>>>>
>>>> What if SomeFunction returns 1 on success? Your test will only "work" if
>>>> SomeFunction returns CLng(True). That might be a reasonable approach
>>>> with VB-authored functions, but will crap out quickly with API calls.
>>>
>>> It relies on SomeFunction() being a properly-behaved logical function.
>>> Under that restriction it is reliable.
>>
>> So in that respect, it is a language dependent construct.
>
> Yes, but within any language (at least any I'm aware of) it is
> self-consistent. The problems really begin when translating from one
> language to another where the definitions while self-consistent may not be
> consistent between languages.
As in the case at hand. <g>
Karl E. Peterson
> On Tue, 20 Jul 2010 10:56:45 -0700, Karl E. Peterson <ka...@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!
ralph
Don't remember any C dialects that used a colon in that context. But
there were a ton of compilers back then.
Normally you would write that as ...
int function(x)
int x;
{
return x;
}
However, int was the default for both arguments and returns, so it
could have just been written ...
function(x) {
return x;
}
Later, "ANSI C" came along which allowed you to make your declarations
in place. ...
int function(int x) {
return x;
}
It occasionally comes as a surprise to many programmers that there was
no C standard until 1986 (and not universally adopted till several
years after that), and "K&R" never was a true standard though often
labeled as one. However, most compilers consider the K&R as the core
language requirement, and most of what was to become "ANSI C" was
already in use via vendor extensions long before 1986.
What fascinated me back then was how quickly "ANSI C" caught on, since
then as now the C community was populated with the most arrogant
pompus obnoxious malaperts ever to grace this planet. (And I should
know, I was one of them. <g>)
Instead they vented their viciousness against the proper placement of
braces, indents, naming conventions, and editors.
-ralph
Tom Shelton
> On Tue, 20 Jul 2010 12:22:48 -0600, Tom Shelton
> <tom_s...@comcast.invalid> wrote:
>
>
>> Ah... K & R C :)
>>
>> function(x) : int {
>> return x;
>> }
>>
>> Fun stuff that :) I can't remember if the above is completely accurate
>> to the original C - but, in my first job I had to work with some old C
>> code written on some old motorola unix sysstems... So, I got to play
>> quite a bit with some of the old style K&R stuff - but that was almost
>> 10 years ago now :)
>
> Don't remember any C dialects that used a colon in that context. But
> there were a ton of compilers back then.
>
> Normally you would write that as ...
> int function(x)
> int x;
> {
> return x;
> }
That's it. I hadn't seen or worked with that stuff for 10 years...
You tend to forget those little details :)
> However, int was the default for both arguments and returns, so it
> could have just been written ...
> function(x) {
> return x;
> }
>
Sure, I only put the int in to show the typing :)
> Later, "ANSI C" came along which allowed you to make your declarations
> in place. ...
> int function(int x) {
> return x;
> }
>
Yep... Thats the norm today.
> It occasionally comes as a surprise to many programmers that there was
> no C standard until 1986 (and not universally adopted till several
> years after that), and "K&R" never was a true standard though often
> labeled as one. However, most compilers consider the K&R as the core
> language requirement, and most of what was to become "ANSI C" was
> already in use via vendor extensions long before 1986.
>
That's how many standards evolve...
> What fascinated me back then was how quickly "ANSI C" caught on, since
> then as now the C community was populated with the most arrogant
> pompus obnoxious malaperts ever to grace this planet. (And I should
> know, I was one of them. <g>)
>
> Instead they vented their viciousness against the proper placement of
> braces, indents, naming conventions, and editors.
Dude... That's programmers in general. Language to most developers is
a religion (My self included :)). I've had the oppertunity to work
with several in my career, and I'm glad of it.
--
Tom Shelton
Kevin Provance
:
: I'd still wager the particular piece of code was written after its
: author had just been indoctrinated in a defensive programming training
: session or read the latest issue of one of the "C/C++ pitfalls"
: columns... :)
It's from MSFT's CAB SDK, actually. <g>
Dee Earley
If Not blah() <> 0 Then
:p
In that case, I normally use:
If Blah() = 0 Then
--
Dee Earley (dee.e...@icode.co.uk)
i-Catcher Development Team
iCode Systems
(Replies direct to my email address will be ignored.
Please reply to the group.)
Dee Earley
I guess that's why C# became strongly typed and if() expected
expressions to be explicitly true or false (e.g. compared to a specific
value/range).
Paul Clement
On Tue, 20 Jul 2010 12:01:57 -0700, Karl E. Peterson <ka...@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. :-)
Karl E. Peterson
You're using a different language, so that's totally irrelevant.
Paul Clement
¤ Paul Clement presented the following explanation :
That's what I was trying to tell you. ;-)
DanS
news:i24hof$rd4$1...@news.eternal-september.org:
> DanS formulated on Tuesday :
>>>> ¤ Why put FALSE == instead of the function first, like
>>>> we usually do?
>>>>
>>>> Looks like the Yoda School of Programming to me. Coded
>>>> properly, the comparison to FALSE isn't even necessary.
>>>>
>>>
>>> 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. What does this actualy have to do
> with my response?
Why would you ask that ?
Your response to the question was......
"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."
Goto LoopHere;
Karl E. Peterson
No need! I've known you're totally irrelevent for years! :-)
But thanks for sharing that with the group, I guess. <shrug>
dpb
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"?
--
Bob Butler
<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.
ralph
>
>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'm just surprised that such an innocuous question generated so much
chaff.
You (dps) hit it dead on with the first reply.
It is simply a coding convention that dates back to K&R to help catch
a particular coding error - typing "=" (an assignment), instead of
"==" (equality) - type the constant/literal first and get an compile
error if you attempt to assign rather than compare. Period.
(Certainly doesn't have a d*mn thing to do with boolean returns etc.
In the example give the constant just happens to be "FALSE", but it
could have as easily been "EOL", "SUCCESS", "BIG_BAD_ERROR_FLAG",
"WOOT_WOOT", or anything else. The rule/tip/practice would still
apply.)
Personally, I never worried about following it faithfully (just
habit). I mean it is a decent idea, and there is certainly no harm in
it, but it's not that big of a deal*.
1) If you are writing a conditional and you recognize you are using a
constant/literal then the same mental alarm that says - "Hey, better
type that constant first", pretty much goes on to say - "Hey, better
make sure you are typing the equally operator".
2) It only works with constants or literals. You can still mess up if
comparing variables.
3) I usually use a lint utility, and lint as well as most modern
compiler's static checking will issue a warning if you use an
assignment operator in a conditional statement.
(I'm a firm believer in setting /W4 and compiling with no warnings.
<g>)
[* However you will always find shops that will consider it a cardinal
sin if you don't do it. Also for some reason it always seems to show
up on C/C++ tests and as a potential interview question.]
Tom Shelton
No one said it was a bug in the language...
--
Tom Shelton
Tom Shelton
> On Wed, 21 Jul 2010 17:44:29 -0500, dpb <no...@non.net> wrote:
>
>
>>
>> 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'm just surprised that such an innocuous question generated so much
> chaff.
>
> You (dps) hit it dead on with the first reply.
> It is simply a coding convention that dates back to K&R to help catch
> a particular coding error - typing "=" (an assignment), instead of
> "==" (equality) - type the constant/literal first and get an compile
> error if you attempt to assign rather than compare. Period.
>
> (Certainly doesn't have a d*mn thing to do with boolean returns etc.
The only reason boolean returns came into it is because most modern
languages force conditionals (if, while, etc) to only accept a
statement that evaluates to a boolean - so the old constant == varialbe
convention isn't a requirement.... You get a compiler error in either
direction.
In other words, they treat boolean as more then just 0 or non-zero...
> In the example give the constant just happens to be "FALSE", but it
> could have as easily been "EOL", "SUCCESS", "BIG_BAD_ERROR_FLAG",
> "WOOT_WOOT", or anything else. The rule/tip/practice would still
> apply.)
>
> Personally, I never worried about following it faithfully (just
> habit).
> I mean it is a decent idea, and there is certainly no harm in
> it, but it's not that big of a deal*.
>
> 1) If you are writing a conditional and you recognize you are using a
> constant/literal then the same mental alarm that says - "Hey, better
> type that constant first", pretty much goes on to say - "Hey, better
> make sure you are typing the equally operator".
> 2) It only works with constants or literals. You can still mess up if
> comparing variables.
> 3) I usually use a lint utility, and lint as well as most modern
> compiler's static checking will issue a warning if you use an
> assignment operator in a conditional statement.
> (I'm a firm believer in setting /W4 and compiling with no warnings.
> <g>)
>
> [* However you will always find shops that will consider it a cardinal
> sin if you don't do it. Also for some reason it always seems to show
> up on C/C++ tests and as a potential interview question.]
Coding standards are a good thing... I didn't really believe in tight
standards, until recently we farmed out some of our stuff to an india
team.... Our standards are getting much tighter now.
--
Tom Shelton
ralph
<tom_s...@comcast.invalid> wrote:
>
>The only reason boolean returns came into it is because most modern
>languages force conditionals (if, while, etc) to only accept a
>statement that evaluates to a boolean - so the old constant == varialbe
>convention isn't a requirement.... You get a compiler error in either
>direction.
>
But the question had nothing to do with *other languages* it was a
C/C++ example, and placing a Constant first has always been a nice
habit to get into when doing comparisons, period.
In the example the other operand was a function, so an error was
likely in either case, but likely had nothing to do with the
programmer employing the convention.
And where did you get the idea you CAN NOT do an assignment in a
conditional statement????
-ralph
Tom Shelton
> On Wed, 21 Jul 2010 19:07:31 -0600, Tom Shelton
> <tom_s...@comcast.invalid> wrote:
>
>
>>
>> The only reason boolean returns came into it is because most modern
>> languages force conditionals (if, while, etc) to only accept a
>> statement that evaluates to a boolean - so the old constant == varialbe
>> convention isn't a requirement.... You get a compiler error in either
>> direction.
>>
>
> But the question had nothing to do with *other languages* it was a
> C/C++ example, and placing a Constant first has always been a nice
> habit to get into when doing comparisons, period.
>
To prevent an ACCIDENTAL assignment. I understand that. And that is
the basic answer...
> In the example the other operand was a function, so an error was
> likely in either case, but likely had nothing to do with the
> programmer employing the convention.
>
> And where did you get the idea you CAN NOT do an assignment in a
> conditional statement????
>
I didn't say you can't... I didn't even say you would want to. It is
just a common old C/C++ bug to ACCIDENTLY do an assignment. The
convention of constant first was simply to avoid that mistake.
You can even do an assignent in C# and Java - it's jsut the result of
your expresion must be a boolean.
string line;
while ((line = reader.ReadLine()) != null)
{
}
--
Tom Shelton
Cor
Why C# and Java
You can do it in VB too
If (((Not X) = 1)) = False) then
However, it keeps showing for me the knowledge of the developer who did
this.
Cor
"Tom Shelton" <tom_s...@comcast.invalid> wrote in message
news:i28dvd$35b$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
Henning
/Henning
"Cor" <Notmyfi...@planet.nl> skrev i meddelandet
news:e9p1jtXK...@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
Cor
from Tom.
With option strict on you need to convert first to Boolean, but I did not
find that real relevant for this newsgroup.
"Henning" <comput...@coldmail.com> wrote in message
news:i295a9$l2v$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
DanS
I don't know, I've never thought about it.
I do know, however, that the times I've done an assignment vs.
a compare, the code didn't work.
(Yes, I know you, or I could give a 1000 examples of how it
may work, yet still be incorrect.)
Bob Butler
"Tom Shelton" <tom_s...@comcast.invalid> wrote in message
news:i2852b$u82$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
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.
Dee Earley
Only if it makes it into a build.
If the compiler catches it (due to coding standards) then its a syntax
error.
dpb
>>>>>> 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,
...
>> 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> :)
--
Tom Shelton
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
Paul Clement
¤ > ¤ > ¤ > ¤ > 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? ;-)
Karl E. Peterson
I bet you wonder about a lot of things...
dpb
> On 20/07/2010 19:31, dpb wrote:
>> ...it [TRUE==/0] is an idiom/convention too ingrained
>> into C/C++ vernacular to ever die. And, afaik, TRUE is still equated to
>> nonzero not only to the value of the _one_true_TRUE_ (tm) and will have
>> to remain because otherwise it breaks almost every C/C++ code in
>> existence.
>
> I guess that's why C# became strongly typed and if() expected
> expressions to be explicitly true or false (e.g. compared to a specific
> value/range).
Which is, of course, allowed when one creates a new language definition
but not a reasonable action in existing Standard revisions. That type
of backward incompatibility would never get consideration by a committee
what more adoption.
--
Paul Clement
¤ > ¤ > ¤ > ¤ > ¤ > 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...
Yes, like why this place is beginning to remind of the MSForum on CompuServe. ;-)
dpb
> On Wed, 21 Jul 2010 19:07:31 -0600, Tom Shelton
> <tom_s...@comcast.invalid> wrote:
>
>
>> The only reason boolean returns came into it is because most modern
>> languages force conditionals (if, while, etc) to only accept a
>> statement that evaluates to a boolean - so the old constant == varialbe
>> convention isn't a requirement.... You get a compiler error in either
>> direction.
>>
>
> But the question had nothing to do with *other languages* it was a
> C/C++ example, and placing a Constant first has always been a nice
> habit to get into when doing comparisons, period.
Not that it is of any import, but...
The introduction of the return values was (at least in my posting) a
sidebar brought up owing to the comment of Kevin's in a followup wherein
he mentioned he was converting C/C++ to VB.
Since the definition of TRUE/FALSE is not consistent between the two,
just wanted to remind of the need to be certain any translation
maintains the initial intent. Particularly important w/ VB since the
NOT operator isn't a logical operator but a bitwise and it might be
tempting to write it as If(NOT function() Then... to eliminate
awkward-looking arrangement as was. That, of course, breaks if the
function return is anything other than 0/1 altho the corresponding C
if(~function()) {... is ok owing to the logical "~" instead of bitwise
"!" analogous to Not.
The assignment vis a vis comparison portion of it is/was addressed
earlier as noted; I simply added a personal caveat that _IF_ (the
proverbial "big if") there were some other reason owing to C/C++
"features" that any such were beyond my level of expertise.
Anyway, that's why I brought up the language comparison... :)
--
Dee Earley
Yeah, I ignore half the threads going on atm...
Kevin Provance
"Paul Clement" <UseAdddressA...@swspectrum.com> wrote in message
news:pp3j4614a8n33u8uj...@4ax.com...
:
: Yes, like why this place is beginning to remind of the MSForum on
CompuServe. ;-)
Did you ever stop to think it might be that way because evangelists like
you, Cory and Skelton have nothing better to do that come here and shove the
dot next angle in every chance you get? The only reason you do it is to
stir up trouble, looking for responses (textbook troll/bully behaviour).
Tell you what, stop doing it for a week, no matter how hard it is to resist
and watch how this forum goes back to normal. Solid factual evidence you
cannot dispute. Maybe then it'll sink in. Plus, take all the time you
spend trolling here and apply it to your dingleball forums, maybe you earn
some more dingleballs to hang next to your elite IV.
As far as cenn the henn (aka se) and vicki go, and their personal vendetta
against me, just ignore them. I don't even see them anymore since
killfiling them both...not that anyone is missing much. As much as you
would like to, paulie, you can't hold me responsible for thier childish
behaviour as I have no control over what little boys do with their
obsessions. I mean, anyone who spends that much time on search engine
looking for every little tibit I've ever posted across the vast Internet
(while cowardly hiding behind phony names) needs to see a psychiatrist, coz
medication *will* be needed.
I will give you credit where credit is due, however. Not hiding behind a
phony or anonymous name.
Paul Clement
¤
¤ "Paul Clement" <UseAdddressA...@swspectrum.com> wrote in message
¤ news:pp3j4614a8n33u8uj...@4ax.com...
¤ :
¤ : Yes, like why this place is beginning to remind of the MSForum on
¤ CompuServe. ;-)
¤
¤ Did you ever stop to think it might be that way because evangelists like
¤ you, Cory and Skelton have nothing better to do that come here and shove the
¤ dot next angle in every chance you get?
Nope, never crossed my mind.
¤ The only reason you do it is to
¤ stir up trouble, looking for responses (textbook troll/bully behaviour).
¤ Tell you what, stop doing it for a week, no matter how hard it is to resist
¤ and watch how this forum goes back to normal. Solid factual evidence you
¤ cannot dispute. Maybe then it'll sink in. Plus, take all the time you
¤ spend trolling here and apply it to your dingleball forums, maybe you earn
¤ some more dingleballs to hang next to your elite IV.
Actually, I stayed away for about six months at one point because of the non-stop personal attacks.
Nothing changed upon my return. You guys we're still sniping at one another.
¤ As far as cenn the henn (aka se) and vicki go, and their personal vendetta
¤ against me, just ignore them. I don't even see them anymore since
¤ killfiling them both...not that anyone is missing much. As much as you
¤ would like to, paulie, you can't hold me responsible for thier childish
¤ behaviour as I have no control over what little boys do with their
¤ obsessions. I mean, anyone who spends that much time on search engine
¤ looking for every little tibit I've ever posted across the vast Internet
¤ (while cowardly hiding behind phony names) needs to see a psychiatrist, coz
¤ medication *will* be needed.
¤
¤ I will give you credit where credit is due, however. Not hiding behind a
¤ phony or anonymous name.
I'm sure some folks have reasons for hiding their identities. I don't really care that much.
In any event, I don't think you understood the CompuServe reference. It was back when Microsoft
shuttered their forums and started their NNTP newsgroups in 1996. CompuServe forums began to die off
in the late 90s as a result of everyone moving to the Internet. I expect Usenet is headed the same
direction, although a bit more slowly, with more of a focus on web sites and forums.
I hope you're not blaming me for that. ;-)
Henning
"Paul Clement" <UseAdddressA...@swspectrum.com> skrev i
meddelandet news:pfnj46d2chr2og22e...@4ax.com...
Simple, if one out of five stay away makes no difference. I don't think I've
seen any VB6'ers argue with each other over .nxt issues.
>
> ¤ As far as cenn the henn (aka se) and vicki go, and their personal
> vendetta
> ¤ against me, just ignore them. I don't even see them anymore since
> ¤ killfiling them both...not that anyone is missing much. As much as you
> ¤ would like to, paulie, you can't hold me responsible for thier childish
> ¤ behaviour as I have no control over what little boys do with their
> ¤ obsessions. I mean, anyone who spends that much time on search engine
> ¤ looking for every little tibit I've ever posted across the vast Internet
> ¤ (while cowardly hiding behind phony names) needs to see a psychiatrist,
> coz
> ¤ medication *will* be needed.
> ¤
> ¤ I will give you credit where credit is due, however. Not hiding behind
> a
> ¤ phony or anonymous name.
>
> I'm sure some folks have reasons for hiding their identities. I don't
> really care that much.
Neither do I, ignoring them takes the fun out of it.
>
> In any event, I don't think you understood the CompuServe reference. It
> was back when Microsoft
> shuttered their forums and started their NNTP newsgroups in 1996.
> CompuServe forums began to die off
> in the late 90s as a result of everyone moving to the Internet. I expect
> Usenet is headed the same
> direction, although a bit more slowly, with more of a focus on web sites
> and forums.
>
> I hope you're not blaming me for that. ;-)
>
>
> Paul
> ~~~~
> Microsoft MVP (Visual Basic)
/Henning
Paul Clement
¤ > ¤ "Paul Clement" <UseAdddressA...@swspectrum.com> wrote in
¤ > message
¤ > ¤ news:pp3j4614a8n33u8uj...@4ax.com...
¤ > ¤ :
¤ > Actually, I stayed away for about six months at one point because of the
¤ > non-stop personal attacks.
¤ > Nothing changed upon my return. You guys we're still sniping at one
¤ > another.
¤
¤ Simple, if one out of five stay away makes no difference. I don't think I've
¤ seen any VB6'ers argue with each other over .nxt issues.
That was the point. They find other things to snipe about. ;-)
Besides, who is a VB6'er anyway? Is that anyone who doesn't use .NET? There are a number of people
here who do use .NET.
Tom Shelton
I spent probably 5 years where I was writting all new stuff in C#, but
I still was supporting - and occasionaly enhancing my older VB6
software.
Lot's of people overlapp.
--
Tom Shelton
Henning
I guess a VB6'er is one who doesn't reply to .nxt questions, or push how
'easy' this or that is in... in this group. ;)
/Henning
Mike Williams
> Lot's of people overlapp.
Quite possibly, but most of them do it with only one 'p' ;-)
Paul Clement
¤ > ¤ > Actually, I stayed away for about six months at one point because of
¤ > the
¤ > ¤ > non-stop personal attacks.
¤ > ¤ > Nothing changed upon my return. You guys we're still sniping at one
¤ > ¤ > another.
¤ > ¤
¤ > ¤ Simple, if one out of five stay away makes no difference. I don't think
¤ > I've
¤ > ¤ seen any VB6'ers argue with each other over .nxt issues.
¤ >
¤ > That was the point. They find other things to snipe about. ;-)
¤ >
¤ > Besides, who is a VB6'er anyway? Is that anyone who doesn't use .NET?
¤ > There are a number of people
¤ > here who do use .NET.
¤ >
¤ >
¤ > Paul
¤ > ~~~~
¤ > Microsoft MVP (Visual Basic)
¤
¤ I guess a VB6'er is one who doesn't reply to .nxt questions, or push how
¤ 'easy' this or that is in... in this group. ;)
¤
¤ /Henning
¤
OK, point taken. ;-)
But I guess it's OK to rip it and spread false information about it? ;-)
Henning
Sorry, been out of site for a few days.
No, it is *not* ok to rip it or spread false info.
You know, I have a dream.
We (those who use VB6) stay away from talking negatively about your version
of VB. Yes, I do accept it as VB, Microsoft say so.
You (those who use .net) don't post any "this is how it's done in...".
We leave the task of redirecting, users who use .net, to you who best know
the forums.
I belive that would make this a much better place. There will ofcause always
be posters like se/senn. I really don't get it why he started hacking on me,
I don't recognize myself in his description.
/Henning
Mike Williams
> I believe that would make this a much better place. There will
> of course always be posters like se/senn. I really don't get it
> why he started hacking on me, I don't recognize myself in his
> description.
Tommy Senn has a personality disorder. He hides behind pseudonyms and behind
his beard and his overly large spectacles. His damaged brain is capable of
rapidly developing a vile and long lived hatred of anyone who says even a
single word that he considers out of place. He is a psychopath.
Mike
Cor
I can count the current regulars in this newsgroup who consequent do like
you write on one hand.
Jeff, Larry, Tom, Paul, Dick
But anything positive here is by some here active seen as negative about
something else.
Like if you tell that you like meat, it means that you don't like fish.
Not even talking about the one who only write rant and is supported by a few
of the regulars here.
Cor
"Henning" <comput...@coldmail.com> wrote in message
news:i2q7bq$ogm$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
>
Mike Williams
news:e$xNKmuLL...@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> Who are *we*? I can count the current regulars in
> this newsgroup who consequent do like you write
> on one hand.
Look, Cor, why don't you just get your act together and persuade your dotnet
evangelist friends to stop pushing dotnet here in what is widely
acknowledged to be the Classic VB group. If you really believe they do not
do that then you've got your head up your arse.
I do not sit on the dotnet groups pushing Classic VB at every opportunity,
and I do not expect dotnetters to sit here on the Classic VB group with the
pretence of answering Classic VB questions when they are really here mainly
to cause trouble. In fact one of your dotnet evangelist friends, Tom
Shelton, has openly admitted here on this group that he has long given up on
Classic VB. So WTF is he doing here!
Come on, Cor, get your head out of your arse and get real. It's not rocket
science. You know exactly why Tom Shelton and the other trouble causing
dotnet evangelists are here, and so do I. Just be sensible and stop doing it
and persuade your dotnet pusher friends to do the same and then there will
be no cause for anyone to retaliate and all will be well. As I have said,
it's not rocket science, Cor, it is simple common sense.
Mike
Cor
I don't think they do it expressly, I've had always discussions with Tom
that he wants to be an evangelist for C#, like he was in past in my eyes
for Linux (mono).
I don't think he knows from himself that he does that and really tries to
avoid that. And at last I believe him, it's just what he does, without
really seeing himself how what he writes, is read by others.
Paul is for sure in this forum not a VB Net evangelist although he is often
pushed to be that by some members here as they write bs about VB Nxt (the
same for me), Dick does not even care whatever it is.
You may call Bill a VB.Nxt evangelist, but Bill is already not active here
for months.
However, the way to be sure evangelists stop, is to ignore them. What do you
as they ring at your door, start a discussion with them? That is what they
want.
If nobody here is interested in VB.Nxt what sense does it than make to write
about it.
Cor
"Mike Williams" <Mi...@WhiskyAndCoke.com> wrote in message
news:i2rfpe$5jf$1...@speranza.aioe.org...
Henning
One of them are the 'we' who use VB6, the others are the 'we' who use .net.
/Henning
"Cor" <Notmyfi...@planet.nl> skrev i meddelandet
news:e$xNKmuLL...@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
Henning
There are also the 'we' all together.
/Henning
"Cor" <Notmyfi...@planet.nl> skrev i meddelandet
news:e$xNKmuLL...@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
Mike Williams
>
> I don't think they do it expressly, I've had always discussions
> with Tom that he wants to be an evangelist for C#, like he
> was in past in my eyes for Linux (mono).
Look, Cor, Paul Shelton has expressly and publicly stated that he gave up on
Classic VB long ago. It is abundantly clear that his main reason for being
here in a Classic VB newsgroup is to deliberately cause trouble, as he so
often actually does. You can close your own eyes to it if you want, but you
are not being honest with either yourself or with others if you deny it.
> However, the way to be sure evangelists stop, is to ignore
> them. What do you as they ring at your door, start a discussion
> with them? That is what they want.
Hang on a minute! You've just finished telling me, in the above statement
and in the rest of your post, that there are no dotnet evangelists trouble
makers here . . . and now you're telling me that the best thing for me to do
is to ignore them! Make your mind up, Cor. You can't have it both ways! Open
your eyes to the truth.
Mike
Mike Williams
> Look, Cor, Paul Shelton has expressly and publicly stated
> that he gave up on Classic VB long ago . . .
Okay. Bit of a typo there. Make that Tom Shelton . . .
Mike
Tom Shelton
> "Cor" <Notmyfi...@planet.nl> wrote in message
> news:%23OBRSbw...@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>>
>> I don't think they do it expressly, I've had always discussions
>> with Tom that he wants to be an evangelist for C#, like he
>> was in past in my eyes for Linux (mono).
>
> Look, Cor, Paul Shelton
Tom Shelton...
> has expressly and publicly stated that he gave up on Classic VB long ago.
Yep. Many times.
> It is abundantly clear that his main reason for being
> here in a Classic VB newsgroup is to deliberately cause trouble,
Not at all true. I was here when I was a VB developer. I was here
when I maintained VB code. I'm still here.
> as he so often actually does.
LOL... I think if you go back and check you'll find that it is not I
that started anything. I am simply responding to lies and
disinfromation that are regularly spewed here. For instance,
Mayayana's made up history of Visual Basic version #'s.
I do not attack, unless attacked. I do not purposfully or regularly
post .NET answers to questions. I do not start these threads...
So, how am I the one that causes trouble, hmmmm?
> You can close your own eyes to it if you want, but you
> are not being honest with either yourself or with others if you deny it.
>
No - You are being over sensitive.
>> However, the way to be sure evangelists stop, is to ignore
>> them. What do you as they ring at your door, start a discussion
>> with them? That is what they want.
>
> Hang on a minute! You've just finished telling me, in the above statement and
> in the rest of your post, that there are no dotnet evangelists trouble makers
> here . . . and now you're telling me that the best thing for me to do is to
> ignore them! Make your mind up, Cor. You can't have it both ways! Open your
> eyes to the truth.
No, Mike - I believe it is you and Kevin that need to open your eyes to
the truth. You spend so much time spewing hatred that it is now
running over into other areas. In the old days, you seemed a much
nicer and more pleasent person...
--
Tom Shelton
Mike Williams
"Tom Shelton" <tom_s...@comcast.invalid> wrote in message
> No, Mike - I believe it is you and Kevin that need to
> open your eyes to the truth. You spend so much time
> spewing hatred that it is now running over into other
> areas. In the old days, you seemed a much nicer and
> more pleasent person...
If you want to stop people spewing hatred then have a word with Tommy [aka
Senn or Se] who has for a long time been conducting a vile campaign of abuse
and hatred against certain people here, partly in the group but mostly by
harassing them at their private email address, whilst attempting to keep his
own real name and email address secret.
Mike
Tom Shelton
I am sorry to hear that. I do not condone that kind of abuse,
especially when taken off the groups. I hope you get that problem
straightened out.
--
Tom Shelton
Cor
message not like it was. I've written about somebody who sees himself as a
VB Nxt evangelist.
His name is not Paul or Tom, I even did not use surnames.
His first name is clearly in my message and that is not Tom.
Cor
"Mike Williams" <Mi...@WhiskyAndCoke.com> wrote in message
news:i2rqqn$ll3$1...@speranza.aioe.org...
se
"Tom Shelton" <tom_s...@comcast.invalid> skrev i meddelelsen
news:i2ru1a$96n$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
I don't even know the lunatics email-addresses.
/se
Tom Shelton
I really don't want to be dragged into this war. Personally, I like
Mike - or used too :) Kevin is a useless POS as far as I'm concerned,
but I don't think it's right to bring in personal lives and information
into the groups - and I don't like taking what happens here out...
Anyway, hope you guys get this straightend out... Good luck.
--
Tom Shelton
Mike Williams
news:i2s3fb$23l$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
> I don't even know his email-addresses.
No you don't, Tommy, and very glad I am of that too. In fact I never
suggested that you did know my email address. Your hate campaign against me
was directed to the group and your thoroughly evil and much more nasty
campaign of hatred via personal email addresses is in fact being waged by
you against people other than myself. You are a nasty piece of shit Tommy.
Mike
se
"Tom Shelton" <tom_s...@comcast.invalid> skrev i meddelelsen
>>
>> I don't even know the lunatics email-addresses.
>> /se
>
> I really don't want to be dragged into this war. Personally, I like
> Mike - or used too :) Kevin is a useless POS as far as I'm concerned, but
> I don't think it's right to bring in personal lives and information into
> the groups - and I don't like taking what happens here out...
>
> Anyway, hope you guys get this straightend out... Good luck.
>
> --
> Tom Shelton
>
>
> into the groups - and I don't like taking what happens here out...
I didn't take anything out. I told you this. -Don't know theire emails.
Those two lunatics apparently has taken it OUT. As you may have
noticed, they took a completely innocent person, who have a
middle-name same as I use here, in custody.
I had trouble with Mike 5-6 years back. I thought it was over.
(that time back the same streetboy language with sexual harassments
without any evidence, just taken out of the blue air.).
Now (in this round) he started it here (a copy below) without any
reason except of defending Kevin - on your behalf. And on mine too.
That's where it all begun.
The only way I can straightend things out is by telling the truth.
There's no reason you commend on this post. Don't answer it.
So you'll not be drawn into it more than you already is.
But as long as those two depraved is here, there will never be
peace. They will always need someone to peck on. That's a
nature of theire. It's been so all along, without the present of
me.
/se
"Mike Williams" <Mi...@WhiskyAndCoke.com> skrev i meddelelsen
news:i2gump$pvp$1...@speranza.aioe.org...
> "se" <se@onfakeplace&.atbigfix> wrote in message
> news:i2gqrq$pli$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
>
>> Newsgroups always been knowned also as
>> a play-room for psychopaths
>
> You mean a place where people can speak their minds, as opposed to a place
> like the Micro$oft forums where people are coerced into saying only what
> pleases Micro$oft! You're a little pussy, Se (or whatever your real name
> is under the name you are hiding behind). You're a little Micro$oft pussy
> cat. Go lick your master's arse on one of his forums. In fact on such a
> forum you can post a little picture of yourself licking his arse. He'd
> like that. You would probably get some of those little Micro$oft boy scout
> forum badges for it.
>
> The Tom Shelton person you are defending has already publicly admitted
> that he has long abandoned VB Classic, and he did so again just yesterday,
> and he is clearly here purely to cause trouble. So WTF are you defending
> him? The implication is that you also are here purely to cause trouble, so
> why don't you just fuck off.
>
> Mike
>
>
>
Kevin Provance
"Tom Shelton" <tom_s...@comcast.invalid> wrote in message
:
: I really don't want to be dragged into this war. Personally, I like
: Mike - or used too :) Kevin is a useless POS as far as I'm concerned,
That's all? You're a useless and worthless waste of life that needs to drop
dead as far as I'm concerned. Why? You do no one any good here, you can't
stay in your dingleball forum with your kind and only serve to push the
envelope in a forum which whose language you claim to not even use anymore.
So as you are constantly asked, why are you really here? It isn't to be
helpful with VB6, so what is it, really? Obsession? Melencholy for days of
yore? What?
. LOL... I think if you go back and check you'll find that it is not I
. that started anything. I am simply responding to lies and
. disinfromation that are regularly spewed here. For instance,
. Mayayana's made up history of Visual Basic version #'s.
Would you like a list of posts from you that prove this to be a lie?
. I do not attack, unless attacked.
Another lie, since you just did.
. I do not purposfully or regularly post .NET answers to questions. I do
not start these threads...
Another lie, but what you do is, on several occasions sais "Whoops, wrong
group, my bad." which is a play directly from the Bill McCarthy aka
RapeClown playbook. As it has been expressed in
comp.lang.basic.visual.misc, no one believes you anymore. You've done it
too many times. Denying your evangelist status is an insult to your kind.
. So, how am I the one that causes trouble, hmmmm?
Your opening unprovoked attack on me is you causing trouble. Another lie.
But, see, this is where you will turn around and say "but you do it all the
time, calling me Skelton or [insert some other colourful metaphore here]".
Yeah, and? I don't lie about my intentions. You think I have something
against you personally, which I don't, since I don't even know you. I have
a lot against you professionally, and I use that term loosley because of
your actions. You can say whatever you want, words are words. Actions are
everything, and your actions are what makes you a useless waste a life, who
should drop dead. This way, you won't be a thorn in the side of this
community. Or you could be a good little dot netter and stay in your
dingleball forum where you can mingle with others of your kind. You would
be out of your hair, and we certainly would have zero reason to be in
yours...everyone would be happy.
But no, as I've pointed out on more than one occasion, you have a queer
obsession with this community where you somehow think your being helpful by
interjection dot next and see sharp every chance you canm, and then hide
behind the "whoops, wrong forum" excuse...you know, the one no one believes
anymore due to repeat offenses.
If I really hated you as a person, I would have wished the worst kind of
painful and life sucking cancer on you so your remaining days would be
filled with pain and agony over the fact that as a human being, you fall
short in every area, all because of the bad karma you've brough on yourself.
But I won't say that, or wish that, because I don't know you outside your
actions in this forum, and frankly, could care less. All I've every wanted
was for you to take your evangelism and keep it where it belongs...one
little thing you just can't or won't do. Now, why is that?
Now, the previous kind of statement I made I reserve for scum suckers like
Tommy Senn who have made it a crusade to dive into every aspect of my life,
including slighted comments about my kid that's going to warrant him a
serious ass kicking in one form or another. But, that ain't your
problem...and you'd do better just to stay out of it.
Tom Shelton
> "Tom Shelton" <tom_s...@comcast.invalid> wrote in message
> news:i2s3ne$378$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
>>
>> I really don't want to be dragged into this war. Personally, I like
>> Mike - or used too :) Kevin is a useless POS as far as I'm concerned,
>
> That's all? You're a useless and worthless waste of life that needs to drop
> dead as far as I'm concerned. Why? You do no one any good here, you can't
> stay in your dingleball forum with your kind and only serve to push the
> envelope in a forum which whose language you claim to not even use anymore.
> So as you are constantly asked, why are you really here? It isn't to be
> helpful with VB6, so what is it, really? Obsession? Melencholy for days of
> yore? What?
>
> . LOL... I think if you go back and check you'll find that it is not I
> . that started anything. I am simply responding to lies and
> . disinfromation that are regularly spewed here. For instance,
> . Mayayana's made up history of Visual Basic version #'s.
>
> Would you like a list of posts from you that prove this to be a lie?
>
Yes.
> . I do not attack, unless attacked.
>
> Another lie, since you just did.
>
And you think that was unprovoked?
> . I do not purposfully or regularly post .NET answers to questions. I do
> not start these threads...
>
> Another lie, but what you do is, on several occasions sais "Whoops, wrong
> group, my bad." which is a play directly from the Bill McCarthy aka
> RapeClown playbook. As it has been expressed in
> comp.lang.basic.visual.misc, no one believes you anymore. You've done it
> too many times. Denying your evangelist status is an insult to your kind.
>
Ok... find all of the instances where I've done that. I doubt you can
find more then 2 or 3 in probably the last few years. You are
exagerating.
Find the number of threads I've started.
And as for comp.lang.basic.visual.misc - you better go read the charter
for that group. It specifically says it's for dicussion for all
versions of visual basic - and like it or not VB.NET is a version of
visual basic. So, unless you get the charter changed, your on shakey
ground there.
The rest of your post is just a bunch of noise.
The simple fact is, I'm here simply because I want to be. I enjoy
reading the threads here - and I do read most of them. Why? Because,
other then you, most people actually have some knowledge of
programming, windows, etc. I learn a lot from those people - some of
which I have associated off and on for years in these groups, long
before I ever heard of you. And, unlike you, I actually know and have
worked with more then one programming language so I can take
techninques I learn and apply them else where...
--
Tom Shelton
Karl E. Peterson
> but I don't think it's right to bring in personal lives and information
> into the groups - and I don't like taking what happens here out...
No lower form of Internet scum than that. No doubts about it!
--
.NET: It's About Trust!
http://vfred.mvps.org
Kevin Provance
news:i2sjg9$94j$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
:
: No lower form of Internet scum than that. No doubts about it!
Careful old top, you don't want senn/se/thomas/[pick a handle] to come after
you too for suggesting he might be anything less than a hero for what he
claims as "exposing the real [me]". He will see this as defense, which
means you aren't on his side and thus you will find everything you've ever
written up for scrutiny. Considering the way he trashed Henning, Thorsten,
Mike and who knows who else...no one is safe.
Mike Williams
> I had trouble with Mike 5-6 years back. I thought it was over.
Well that's really very interesting. It would appear that I am correct and
that you really are a psychopath intent on revenge. Your behaviour is
starting to make sense now (at least as much sense as it can do when dealing
with an obvious lunatic such as yourself). I don't recall anything, nothing
at all, about any 'trouble with you 5-6 years back', as you have put it. If
there was some 'trouble' all that time ago then for me it was over a very
long time ago and I have no recollection of it. However, it would seem that
it has been stewing in your deranged mind all those years and you are now
intent on what you probably view as revenge. Whatever it was that you recall
from the newsgroups all those years ago, just let it go. If you insist on
letting these things eat into your damaged brain year after year, as you so
obviously have done so far, then you will eventually lose your sanity
completely. Just let it go Senn, or Se or whatever you are currently calling
yourself, and get on with life.
Mike
Karl E. Peterson
> "Karl E. Peterson" <ka...@exmvps.org> wrote...
>>
>> No lower form of Internet scum than that. No doubts about it!
>
> Careful old top,
Anyone who doesn't understand that online gathering spots are akin to a
sandbox represents a danger society at large. They need to be removed.
Mike Williams
> Anyone who doesn't understand that online gathering spots
> are akin to a sandbox represents a danger society at large.
> They need to be removed.
I think that's probably an oversimplificatuion Karl, but I see what you
mean.
Mike
Karl E. Peterson
>> are akin to a sandbox represents a danger society at large.
>> They need to be removed.
>
> I think that's probably an oversimplificatuion Karl, but I see what you mean.
Pick yer analogy.
Vegas rules? This is a "No Duh!" to most rational folks.
(Should've been "a danger _to_ society", above, of course.)
Mike Williams
> After serious thinking Mike Williams wrote :
>> I think that's probably an oversimplification Karl,
>> but I see what you mean.
>
> Pick yer analogy.
> Vegas rules? This is a "No Duh!" to most rational folks.
I'm afraid you've lost me there, Karl. Care to elucidate?
Mike
Tom Shelton
> "Karl E. Peterson" <ka...@exmvps.org> wrote in message
> news:i2t02p$l0r$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
>> After serious thinking Mike Williams wrote :
>
>>> I think that's probably an oversimplification Karl,
>>> but I see what you mean.
>>
>> Pick yer analogy.
>> Vegas rules? This is a "No Duh!" to most rational folks.
>
> I'm afraid you've lost me there, Karl. Care to elucidate?
>
> Mike
Karl is refering to the old saying - "What happens in Vegas, stays in
Vegas"...
--
Tom Shelton
Karl E. Peterson
> After serious thinking Mike Williams wrote :
>>> After serious thinking Mike Williams wrote :
>>
>>>> I think that's probably an oversimplification Karl,
>>>> but I see what you mean.
>>>
>>> Pick yer analogy.
>>> Vegas rules? This is a "No Duh!" to most rational folks.
>>
>> I'm afraid you've lost me there, Karl. Care to elucidate?
>
> Vegas"...
Bingeaux. Most sane folks consider that to apply equally to
newsgroups. I mean, friendly gestures are one thing. But taking
hostilities to another venue is simply loathesome. I'm afraid the
younger generation has lost, or perhaps totally lacks, this basic
social eptitude.
Henning
"Tom Shelton" <tom_s...@comcast.invalid> skrev i meddelandet
news:i2se0k$h0a$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
My guess is that is dated long before anyone even could imagine the
framework. Besides Microsoft is pushing really hard to get everyone to the
new forums, there simply isn't any for classic vb.
I almost said thanks god ;)
/Henning
Kevin Provance
:
: Bingeaux. Most sane folks consider that to apply equally to
: newsgroups. I mean, friendly gestures are one thing. But taking
: hostilities to another venue is simply loathesome. I'm afraid the
: younger generation has lost, or perhaps totally lacks, this basic
: social eptitude.
Some of the best arguments/flames between ex-lovers, divorcing couples and
people who generally don't like each other occur on MySpace, Facebook and
Twitter. So yeah, so hit that nail right on the head.
Then psychos with nothing better to do that waste life compiles these things
into databases like unencyclopedia, or my personal least favourite, ED - for
everyone else to see and marvel over.
Web 2.0 sucks.
Larry Serflaten
> >
> > Careful old top,
>
> Anyone who doesn't understand that online gathering spots are akin to a
> sandbox represents a danger society at large. They need to be removed.
Did you mean a danger TO society?
In any case, I'd disagree. Public forums are just that, public expressions
of one's self. There should be no false pretense of privacy, in a public
venue. Of course, it would be difficult to create a private forum accessable
to the general public for which your sandbox analogy may apply, but that is
the nature of the beast. It must be explicitly stated in a forum charter, or
otherwise understood by all members, that comments made in the forum
should not leave the forum.
Otherwise, posts made to a newsgroup are little different than comments
made at the end of published articles. Both are seen by anyone who
happens by. One could hardly assume that posts made here are a form
of private communication among the members.
That's my take, anyway, and I conduct myself accordingly.
(hint hint)
LFS
Tom Shelton
I agree that one can not count on comments here being private. I have
no delusions that this is not a public forum.
But, there are still boundries that should not be crossed. For
example, I don't believe it would be right for me to track down your
address, phone #, etc and post that here with out your consent. I
don't think I should follow you into other forums and harras you. I
don't think it would be appropriate for me to track down your work
information and contact your employer because I think something you
said was inappropriate.
There is one area I do agree with Kevin on - I'm not a big fan of
anonymous posters or habbitual nym-shifters....
--
Tom Shelton