Che Delilas posted:

What information should I be adding in the header comments?

Dromio posted:

I wouldn't put in a comment at all in that case. What needs explaining?

Funking Giblet posted:

I think you're missing something major! You can validate the configuration at runtime which will find unmapped fields, or write a unit test to do as much. Not to mention injectable value and type resolvers which can be reused across types.

Dietrich posted:

Any time you feel like you have to write a comment to explain your code, it means you need to re-write your code.

(Or you're doing something that makes absolutely no logical sense because there's a framework bug you have to deal with or something)

Destroyenator posted:

Yeah I've seen the validation as unit tests thing, but the places I've seen it usually involve writing a bunch of exceptions for the missing/extra/renamed fields. That's when I get to: why bother, you're effectively writing the maps anyway at this point?
I guess I haven't seen it work out simpler in the long run (though I've only really seen it used extensively twice), but if it works for you great.

bpower posted:

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/system.web.mvc.html.linkextensions_methods(v=vs.118).aspx

As a learning tool thats bloody awful. Where do you guys go to learn about the small things? I seem to just bounce around the web looking for examples.

fleshweasel posted:

Overcommenting is terrible, and a code style that "documents" itself well is important, but it's too much to say that good code never warrants comments.

Dietrich posted:

Any time you feel like you have to write a comment to explain your code, it means you need to re-write your code.

(Or you're doing something that makes absolutely no logical sense because there's a framework bug you have to deal with or something)

Che Delilas posted:

Stackoverflow is usually pretty good, though they close "best practices" or opinion questions; they're not interested in discussion. Codeproject can have some decent tutorials. Don't expect them to be up-to-date on everything, but they can be a good overview and starting point. Usually googling your specific issue or question will get you something from one or both of those sites first thing.

Che Delilas posted:

I realize this is , but does anyone have any strong opinions on commenting style for ASP.NET MVC Controller Action header comments specifically?

For example, I have an action:

C# code:

[HttpGet]
public ActionResult Products()
{
   return View(dbContext.Products.ToList());
}

What information should I be adding in the header comments? I know the standard advice is to talk about why things are being done this way, but "displays products because people want to see products" is akin to "assigns the number 5 to the integer variable called myNumber."

Please don't fight with each other over this. I'm less interested in the "right way" as I am just learning what other people do in these situations.

UnhappyEggWhisk posted:

If you must:

C# code:

/// <summary>
/// Displays a <see cref="SomeController.Products"/> view.
/// </summary>
/// <returns>A <see cref="SomeController.Products"/> view.</returns>
[HttpGet]
public ActionResult Products()
{
   return View(dbContext.Products.ToList());
}

fleshweasel posted:

Overcommenting is terrible, and a code style that "documents" itself well is important, but it's too much to say that good code never warrants comments.

Newf posted:

In favor of the css white-space: nowrap? What's the advantage?

aBagorn posted:

Hey, just looking for a couple different opinions here. At my annual review, one of the goals in the next year (in line with me taking more of a leadership role here) is to start actually implementing a peer code review process, and I'm wondering how any of you that have more formalized processes go through with it?

Dietrich posted:

Why the hell is Random.Next() not thread safe?

aBagorn posted:

Dietrich posted:

Why the hell is Random.Next() not thread safe?

Bognar posted:

And, really, you mustn't.

Gul Banana posted:

because it mutates state..? exact same reason that
globalPreviousRandomNumber = currentRandomNumber;
wouldn't be.

bpower posted:

When I get a new Person from the front end the ReportsToId might be an actual Guid or the Empty "0000000000-0000000-0000" .

wwb posted:

That is one way though there are a number of CSS techniques one could use (ie -- min width) to get there.

The advantage is that you are no longer jamming presentation elements (HTML nonbreaking spaces) into your code and it is overall cleaner and easy to manage long term and it is doing the right thing.

Scaramouche posted:

Dumb question but you guys are my go-to for dumb questions.

I'm building a List (of String), and I want to check if something is already in the list before adding it. However what I'm not sure of, does the .Contains method match any part of any string in the list, or only entire items? So for example if the list is currently:

code:

ruby
emerald
black-diamond

And I want to add 'diamond', will List.Contains("diamond") return true because it's part of the "black-diamond" entry? Or will it return false?

quote:

This method determines equality by using the default equality comparer, as defined by the object's implementation of the IEquatable<T>.Equals method for T (the type of values in the list).

Scaramouche posted:

Dumb question but you guys are my go-to for dumb questions.

I'm building a List (of String), and I want to check if something is already in the list before adding it. However what I'm not sure of, does the .Contains method match any part of any string in the list, or only entire items? So for example if the list is currently:

code:

ruby
emerald
black-diamond

And I want to add 'diamond', will List.Contains("diamond") return true because it's part of the "black-diamond" entry? Or will it return false?

Scaramouche posted:

Dumb question but you guys are my go-to for dumb questions.

I'm building a List (of String), and I want to check if something is already in the list before adding it. However what I'm not sure of, does the .Contains method match any part of any string in the list, or only entire items? So for example if the list is currently:

code:

ruby
emerald
black-diamond

And I want to add 'diamond', will List.Contains("diamond") return true because it's part of the "black-diamond" entry? Or will it return false?

Scaramouche posted:

Dumb question but you guys are my go-to for dumb questions.

I'm building a List (of String), and I want to check if something is already in the list before adding it. However what I'm not sure of, does the .Contains method match any part of any string in the list, or only entire items? So for example if the list is currently:

code:

ruby
emerald
black-diamond

And I want to add 'diamond', will List.Contains("diamond") return true because it's part of the "black-diamond" entry? Or will it return false?

quote:

There are no AppDomains in .NET Core (nor any other .NET platform that we've released since .NET Framework itself). AppDomains add a significant overhead/complexity to the runtime, and are not what we internally call "pay for play". That is, regardless if you use them or not, AppDomains result in a ~5% overhead for all apps. For example, in mscorlib (which is domain neutral, and is loaded once for all AppDomains), every static field access requires an extra indirection. AppDomains made sense back in v1 of .NET, where sandboxing and isolation was a goal. In recent years however, partial trust is no longer guaranteed.