|
web
newsgroups
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
AndAlso, OrElse and bracketsWe have been having a lively debate at work about whether or not we
should use brackets with conditionals that contain AndAlso. This is because AndAlso has precedence over OrElse and I say that it makes code more manageable if brackets are included. False OrElse True AndAlso False will return False because AndAlso has precedence over OrElse. I say that this is better written as: False OrElse (True AndAlso False) What do you think? I agree with you - include the parentheses. More so with less often used
constructs, and more so with more complex expressions. Intent will be clear to the new guy next year whose first assignment is making a mod to this code. Show quoteHide quote "Mike Ratcliffe" wrote: > We have been having a lively debate at work about whether or not we > should use brackets with conditionals that contain AndAlso. This is > because AndAlso has precedence over OrElse and I say that it makes > code more manageable if brackets are included. > > False OrElse True AndAlso False will return False because AndAlso has > precedence over OrElse. > > I say that this is better written as: > False OrElse (True AndAlso False) > > What do you think? > . > Am 22.03.2010 13:32, schrieb Mike Ratcliffe:
> We have been having a lively debate at work about whether or not we Agreeing with AMercer.> should use brackets with conditionals that contain AndAlso. This is > because AndAlso has precedence over OrElse and I say that it makes > code more manageable if brackets are included. > > False OrElse True AndAlso False will return False because AndAlso has > precedence over OrElse. > > I say that this is better written as: > False OrElse (True AndAlso False) > > What do you think? -- Armin Mike,
This are question which completely depends on the knowledge of the users. Some say parentheses make it easier to read, others say you would not put things in code without a function, because then others become suspicious and take time in it to examine why you did it and when they cannot find it, take even more time. However, personally I do it too, because I am simply to lazy to reminds me what goes first especially in a not situation. But to say that it is better, like I wrote, it is mainly because I'm lazy. jmo Cor Show quoteHide quote "Mike Ratcliffe" <sabine.michael.ratcli***@gmail.com> wrote in message news:1693dfce-1557-4369-889c-c271c72a3bf6@m37g2000yqf.googlegroups.com... > We have been having a lively debate at work about whether or not we > should use brackets with conditionals that contain AndAlso. This is > because AndAlso has precedence over OrElse and I say that it makes > code more manageable if brackets are included. > > False OrElse True AndAlso False will return False because AndAlso has > precedence over OrElse. > > I say that this is better written as: > False OrElse (True AndAlso False) > > What do you think? Am 22.03.2010 13:32, schrieb Mike Ratcliffe:
> We have been having a lively debate at work about whether or not we I don't like the brackets, but I'd suggest to use them because I doubt > should use brackets with conditionals that contain AndAlso. This is > because AndAlso has precedence over OrElse and I say that it makes > code more manageable if brackets are included. > > False OrElse True AndAlso False will return False because AndAlso has > precedence over OrElse. > > I say that this is better written as: > False OrElse (True AndAlso False) > > What do you think? that anybody who will work on the code is aware of the precendence rules ;-). -- M S Herfried K. Wagner M V P <URL:http://dotnet.mvps.org/> V B <URL:http://dotnet.mvps.org/dotnet/faqs/> i believe math rules are universal and that is the reasson thart using
brackets would give self documentation of the code , and that alone would make it "good coding practice" in my homble opinion HTH Michel Posseth Show quoteHide quote "Mike Ratcliffe" <sabine.michael.ratcli***@gmail.com> schreef in bericht news:1693dfce-1557-4369-889c-c271c72a3bf6@m37g2000yqf.googlegroups.com... > We have been having a lively debate at work about whether or not we > should use brackets with conditionals that contain AndAlso. This is > because AndAlso has precedence over OrElse and I say that it makes > code more manageable if brackets are included. > > False OrElse True AndAlso False will return False because AndAlso has > precedence over OrElse. > > I say that this is better written as: > False OrElse (True AndAlso False) > > What do you think? "Mike Ratcliffe" <sabine.michael.ratcli***@gmail.com> wrote in message I agree.news:1693dfce-1557-4369-889c-c271c72a3bf6@m37g2000yqf.googlegroups.com... > We have been having a lively debate at work about whether or not we > should use brackets with conditionals that contain AndAlso. This is > because AndAlso has precedence over OrElse and I say that it makes > code more manageable if brackets are included. > False OrElse True AndAlso False will return False because AndAlso has Bad example> precedence over OrElse. > > I say that this is better written as: > False OrElse (True AndAlso False) (False OrElse True) AndAlso False = False False OrElse (True AndAlso False) = False and all expressions always need to be evaluated. An example where it matters: True OrElse True AndAlso False (True OrElse True) AndAlso False = False True OrElse (True AndAlso False) = True and the expressions in the AndAlso in the second case are now not even evaluated. -- Regards, Mark Hurd, B.Sc.(Ma.) (Hons.) We have a guy working here that is a brilliant developer, he is a
genius when it comes to dealing with extremely complex stuff. He doesn't like the idea of adding "unnecessary brackets" as he says that he never has to think twice when he looks at conditions. Personally I don't see how using brackets in this situation could be a bad thing but I guess he is pretty resistant to change. I just find it fascinating that anybody would be opposed to such an obvious improvement. Show quoteHide quote On 24 Mar, 01:23, "Mark Hurd" <markh***@ozemail.com.au> wrote: > "Mike Ratcliffe" <sabine.michael.ratcli***@gmail.com> wrote in message > > news:1693dfce-1557-4369-889c-c271c72a3bf6@m37g2000yqf.googlegroups.com... > > > We have been having a lively debate at work about whether or not we > > should use brackets with conditionals that contain AndAlso. This is > > because AndAlso has precedence over OrElse and I say that it makes > > code more manageable if brackets are included. > > I agree. > > > False OrElse True AndAlso False will return False because AndAlso has > > precedence over OrElse. > > > I say that this is better written as: > > False OrElse (True AndAlso False) > > Bad example > > (False OrElse True) AndAlso False = False > False OrElse (True AndAlso False) = False > > and all expressions always need to be evaluated. > > An example where it matters: > True OrElse True AndAlso False > (True OrElse True) AndAlso False = False > True OrElse (True AndAlso False) = True > > and the expressions in the AndAlso in the second case are now not even > evaluated. > > -- > Regards, > Mark Hurd, B.Sc.(Ma.) (Hons.) Does he consume only his own code ?
I myself prefer to have them because when I read someone else code, if they are not there, I tend to double check that the condition really makes sense in case the guy who wrote the code made a mistake by omitting them ;-) -- Patrice "Mike Ratcliffe" <sabine.michael.ratcli***@gmail.com> a écrit dans le message de groupe de discussion : c02e923a-7a10-41ec-b24f-d5d113418***@e7g2000yqf.googlegroups.com... Show quoteHide quote > We have a guy working here that is a brilliant developer, he is a > genius when it comes to dealing with extremely complex stuff. He > doesn't like the idea of adding "unnecessary brackets" as he says that > he never has to think twice when he looks at conditions. Personally I > don't see how using brackets in this situation could be a bad thing > but I guess he is pretty resistant to change. > > I just find it fascinating that anybody would be opposed to such an > obvious improvement. > > On 24 Mar, 01:23, "Mark Hurd" <markh***@ozemail.com.au> wrote: >> "Mike Ratcliffe" <sabine.michael.ratcli***@gmail.com> wrote in message >> >> news:1693dfce-1557-4369-889c-c271c72a3bf6@m37g2000yqf.googlegroups.com... >> >> > We have been having a lively debate at work about whether or not we >> > should use brackets with conditionals that contain AndAlso. This is >> > because AndAlso has precedence over OrElse and I say that it makes >> > code more manageable if brackets are included. >> >> I agree. >> >> > False OrElse True AndAlso False will return False because AndAlso has >> > precedence over OrElse. >> >> > I say that this is better written as: >> > False OrElse (True AndAlso False) >> >> Bad example >> >> (False OrElse True) AndAlso False = False >> False OrElse (True AndAlso False) = False >> >> and all expressions always need to be evaluated. >> >> An example where it matters: >> True OrElse True AndAlso False >> (True OrElse True) AndAlso False = False >> True OrElse (True AndAlso False) = True >> >> and the expressions in the AndAlso in the second case are now not even >> evaluated. >> >> -- >> Regards, >> Mark Hurd, B.Sc.(Ma.) (Hons.) > > I agree with that guy, YOU want to change rules which are already more than
5000 years old. Which does not mean that in complex situations I simply set some parentheses. Although I then mostly earlier break up the code with some more ifs. But the guy is right. Cor Show quoteHide quote "Mike Ratcliffe" <sabine.michael.ratcli***@gmail.com> wrote in message news:c02e923a-7a10-41ec-b24f-d5d113418ed4@e7g2000yqf.googlegroups.com... > We have a guy working here that is a brilliant developer, he is a > genius when it comes to dealing with extremely complex stuff. He > doesn't like the idea of adding "unnecessary brackets" as he says that > he never has to think twice when he looks at conditions. Personally I > don't see how using brackets in this situation could be a bad thing > but I guess he is pretty resistant to change. > > I just find it fascinating that anybody would be opposed to such an > obvious improvement. > > On 24 Mar, 01:23, "Mark Hurd" <markh***@ozemail.com.au> wrote: >> "Mike Ratcliffe" <sabine.michael.ratcli***@gmail.com> wrote in message >> >> news:1693dfce-1557-4369-889c-c271c72a3bf6@m37g2000yqf.googlegroups.com... >> >> > We have been having a lively debate at work about whether or not we >> > should use brackets with conditionals that contain AndAlso. This is >> > because AndAlso has precedence over OrElse and I say that it makes >> > code more manageable if brackets are included. >> >> I agree. >> >> > False OrElse True AndAlso False will return False because AndAlso has >> > precedence over OrElse. >> >> > I say that this is better written as: >> > False OrElse (True AndAlso False) >> >> Bad example >> >> (False OrElse True) AndAlso False = False >> False OrElse (True AndAlso False) = False >> >> and all expressions always need to be evaluated. >> >> An example where it matters: >> True OrElse True AndAlso False >> (True OrElse True) AndAlso False = False >> True OrElse (True AndAlso False) = True >> >> and the expressions in the AndAlso in the second case are now not even >> evaluated. >> >> -- >> Regards, >> Mark Hurd, B.Sc.(Ma.) (Hons.) > "Cor Ligthert[MVP]" <Notmyfirstn***@planet.nl> wrote in message If you were talking about the basic arithmetic operators, */ +-, you'd news:OEf%23FG$yKHA.5040@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl... >I agree with that guy, YOU want to change rules which are already more >than 5000 years old. > > Which does not mean that in complex situations I simply set some > parentheses. > > Although I then mostly earlier break up the code with some more ifs. > > But the guy is right. > > Cor be right, brackets are almost always excessive. But for And and Or I believe there have been computer languages that have a precedence opposite that of Basic (however I couldn't find them with a quick Google search). When you think about it a bit And binding more tightly than Or /does/ make sense, but it isn't anywhere near as definite as multiplication and addition (admittedly probably because we get taught BODMAS -- or one of the variations described in Wikipedia -- very early in school, where as Boolean algebra might not be formalised until Uni). -- Regards, Mark Hurd, B.Sc.(Ma.) (Hons.) > But for And and Or I believe there have been computer languages that Most probably has somebody created that, but those had probably all a very > have a precedence opposite that of Basic (however I couldn't find them > with a quick Google search). > short lifetime. The Or and And in Visual Basic have no short circuiting, which the OrElse and AndAlso have. This is rare in current program languages but that is not about this. 
Other interesting topics
Mult-Threading and TraceListeners
How Do I Find MyApplication Events? Seperating Debug and Trace Output Get average of a row Running progress indicator in different thread to UI thread Capture events for a control array .NET Logging Library Reading Word field results Using Office XP Word from VB.NET Multiple setup issue |
|||||||||||||||||||||||
