This is the code giving a stack overflow it only happens about half the time and i have no idea why it's doing it. From what I seen it only happens with the Coms(TopCom, etc) are in a mass of numbers so around 5+ then it stack overflows.
public bool getConnected(int d) {
if (topCom.connection != null) {
if (d != topCom.connection.id) {
if (topCom.connection.id == 0) {
return true;
} else if (topCom.connection.connected == true) {
if (Development.instance.currentDos.buttons[topCom.connection.id].getConnected(id)) {
return true;
}
}
}
}
if (leftCom.connection != null) {
if (d != leftCom.connection.id) {
if (leftCom.connection.id == 0) {
return true;
} else if (leftCom.connection.connected == true) {
if (Development.instance.currentDos.buttons[leftCom.connection.id].getConnected(id)) {
return true;
}
}
}
}
if (rightCom.connection != null) {
if (d != rightCom.connection.id) {
if (rightCom.connection.id == 0) {
return true;
} else if (rightCom.connection.connected == true) {
if (Development.instance.currentDos.buttons[rightCom.connection.id].getConnected(id)) {
return true;
}
}
}
}
if (botCom.connection != null) {
if (d != botCom.connection.id) {
if (botCom.connection.id == 0) {
return true;
} else if (botCom.connection.connected == true) {
if (Development.instance.currentDos.buttons[botCom.connection.id].getConnected(id)) {
return true;
}
}
}
}
return false;
}
This happens in recursive functions where you don't have a base condition for ending the recursion. You basically keep calling the function until you reach stack overflow.. Trace your code through and figure out why it calls itself endlessly.
The fact that people here can't really tell what you're trying to accomplish is a code smell of sorts.
A big part of that is the fact that you have an incredible amount of nesting in your code. Nested conditionals increase the difficulty of debugging code, as you're discovering now. Additionally, you could easily combine some of your conditionals - all of your conditionals in any top-level branch can actually be combined into one statement, as follows:
if ((topCom.connection != null && d != topCom.connection.id && topCom.connection.id == 0) ||
(topCom.connection.connected == true &&
Development.instance.currentDos.buttons[topCom.connection.id].getConnected(id)))
{
return true;
}
return false;
As far as I can imagine, there's no point in having separate conditional branches that perform the same function, e.g. if (a) { return true; } else if (b) { return true; }. Just move the logic from else if into the original if conditional.
However, I'd recommend encapsulating some or all of this logic into a separate function, given that it seems like you're performing the same logic on each of your connections. You could create a function like so:
public bool ConnectionIsValid(connectionObject // replace with the actual type)
{
if (topCom.connection != null && d != topCom.connection.id && topCom.connection.id == 0)
|| (topCom.connection.connected == true
&& Development.instance.currentDos.buttons[topCom.connection.id].getConnected(id))
return true;
return false;
}
So that you could then just call ConnectionIsValid on each of your connections, rather than using 80-some lines on conditionals for each connection.
It also seems doubtful that there's a StackOverflowException occurring in this code. Unless you have a circular reference related to any of the objects referenced in this code (in which case, there's a decent chance you used a setter accessor to assign a value to the same variable:
object A
{
set
{
this.A = value;
}
}
which will always cause a stack overflow, it's likely you've introduced some sort of recursion outside the scope of the included code.
Related
My question is a bit hard to describe so I have written a hypothetical code (nonfunctioning) down below and I wonder if there is a similar alternative in C#:
if (Red == true)
{
i -= 3;
}
else if (Yellow == true)
{
i -= 2
}
then
{
list.Clear();
}
else{}
A "then" function of sorts that both if statements follow if one where to execute. The use of this would simply be so that I do not need to do in this case a list.Clear(); in every if statement.
No there is no syntax construct like your then but you can create a method that clear the list and accept and returns the value to decrement
private int ClearAndDecrementBy(int decrement)
{
list.Clear();
return decrement;
}
and call it as
if(Red)
{
i -= ClearAndDecrementBy(3);
}
else if(Yellow)
{
i -= ClearAndDecrementBy(2);
}
else
{
}
Not really sure that there is any advantage though. The list should be declared at the global class level and this is never a good practice if it is needed only to make it work in this way. So, adding the call to list.Clear inside the if blocks seems more clear and it won't do any harm
Try this:
if(Red == true)
{
i -= 3;
}
else if(Yellow == true)
{
i -= 2
}
else
{
}
if(Red == True || Yellow == true) //You can add more like: Blue == true
{
list.Clear();
}
You could get rid of the "then" statement from your pseudo code and add the following line to the end of everything.
if (Red || Yellow)
{
list.Clear();
}
Try this:
if (Red || Yellow)
{
i = Red ? -3 : -2;
list.Clear();
}
else { }
I was playing a little in Unity on a project and I stumbled upon an issue I can't address. Please keep in mind I am a beginner, and my understanding of Unity is fairly limited.
So the issue is this..
I wanted to test some if statement that went like this:
void Update()
{
if (isRow1Good() || isRow2Good() || isRow3Good() || isRow4Good() || isRow5Good() ||
isRow6Good() || isRow7Good() || isRow8Good() || isRow9Good() || isRow10Good())
{
Debug.Log("LOL");
}
}
The content of the functions is this:
Piece p1 = row1[0].ReturnPiece();
Piece p2 = row1[1].ReturnPiece();
Piece p3 = row1[2].ReturnPiece();
Piece p4 = row1[3].ReturnPiece();
if (p1.isTall && p2.isTall && p3.isTall && p4.isTall)
{
return true;
}
else if (p1.isRed && p2.isRed && p3.isRed && p4.isRed)
{
return true;
}
else if (p1.isHollow && p2.isHollow && p3.isHollow && p4.isHollow)
{
return true;
}
else if (p1.isCylinder && p2.isCylinder && p3.isCylinder && p4.isCylinder)
{
return true;
}
else
{
return false;
}
And the others are the same, just instead of row1[] it's row2[].
If the first function is true, the console logs the "LOL" message, but if the second or the third and so on are true, the value is not getting outputted. I tried changing the functions' places, every time it only cares if the first one is true, and the rest are ignored.
What would you say I am doing wrong? :D
else if (p1.isRed && p2.isRed && p3.isRed && p4.isRed)
{
return true;
}
else if (p1.isHollow && p2.isHollow && p3.isHollow && p4.isHollow)
{
return true;
}
else if (p1.isCylinder && p2.isCylinder && p3.isCylinder && p4.isCylinder)
{
return true;
}
if I'm understanding you correct if all four pieces in a row are red its not returning true. You need to double check if the 'isRed' is set properly. if p1.isRed and p2.isRed and p3.isRed and p4.isRed then it will return true no matter what. Also double check if you meant to put || instead of &&.
Sometimes I find myself writing a bool method that looks like this:
public bool isRunning()
{
if (!(move == Moving.None) && staminaRegan == true)
{
if (keyState.IsKeyDown(Keys.Space))
{
EntityAnimation.interval = 10;
return true;
}
else
{
EntityAnimation.interval = 65;
return false;
}
}
else
{
EntityAnimation.interval = 65;
return false;
}
}
(This is XNA by the way) As you can see, I have a bool isRunning in which I made an if statement where Im checking if (Player is moving) && (regains stamina, which is set to false once stamina reaches value lesser than 6.0f)
and then I simply check if Space is pressed, if yes then my Animation is faster(the smaller the interval, the faster is spritesheet changing), and then It sends true value, which means that Player is running, else Im not cause Space is not pressed.
And then I have to repeat this 'else' code outside of the first if statement so it sends that Player is not running if Player is not moving or his stamina Regan is false;
So I was just wondering is this kind of a bool method considered a bad practice(where you retrun true and false value in nested if, and then return false outside nested if and repeat the same code) ?
The method has a side effect, that's why it's a bad practice:
public bool isRunning()
When looking on method's signature we expect just true/false answer and nothing more. However, the method changes the instance's state:
...
if (!(move == Moving.None) && staminaRegan == true)
{
if (keyState.IsKeyDown(Keys.Space))
{
EntityAnimation.interval = 10; // <- Aaa! The interval is changed
return true;
}
...
I suggest splitting the initial method into a property and a method
// No side effect: just answer is running or not
public bool IsRunning {
get {
return (move != Moving.None) && staminaRegan && KeyState.IsKeyDown(Keys.Space);
}
}
// Put the right interval based on instance internal state
// (if it's running etc.)
public void AdjustInterval() {
if (IsRunning) // and may be other conditions
EntityAnimation.interval = 10; //TODO: move magic number into constant
else
EntityAnimation.interval = 65; //TODO: move magic number into constant
}
It is a good practice to have one return statement inside a method. Some argue about this, but it is an opinion.
it is also a good practice to make the if statement clear by removing unnecessary code:
public bool isRunning()
{
bool result = false;
if (move != Moving.None && staminaRegan)
{
if (keyState.IsKeyDown(Keys.Space))
{
EntityAnimation.interval = 10;
result = true;
}
else
{
EntityAnimation.interval = 65;
}
}
else
{
EntityAnimation.interval = 65;
}
return result;
}
You can rewrite the code as follows; then the code isn't repeated:
public bool isRunning()
{
if (move != Moving.None && staminaRegan && keyState.IsKeyDown(Keys.Space))
{
EntityAnimation.interval = 10;
return true;
}
else
{
EntityAnimation.interval = 65;
return false;
}
}
Or if you don't want the redundant else:
public bool isRunning()
{
if (move != Moving.None && staminaRegan && keyState.IsKeyDown(Keys.Space))
{
EntityAnimation.interval = 10;
return true;
}
EntityAnimation.interval = 65;
return false;
}
I would consider introducing a named boolean to self-document somewhat, and I'd rename staminaRegan to staminaIsRegenerating
public bool isRunning()
{
bool isMovingQuickly = (move != Moving.None) && staminaIsRegenerating && keyState.IsKeyDown(Keys.Space);
if (isMovingQuickly)
EntityAnimation.interval = 10;
else
EntityAnimation.interval = 65;
return isMovingQuickly;
}
Most importantly, though, you should rename the method to more accurately describe what it's doing:
public bool CheckIfRunningAndSetAnimationInterval()
I think we write code for people(other developers), of course machine execute a code but 80% of developer's work is reading the code.
Based on that I think flow of reading must be exactly same as flow of executing code - that's why I think multiply return statement not a bad thing, even better then only one return statement on the bottom of your method.
I like this style and i use it too. First, you can read the code more easily and second it has a debugging advantage as you can set breakpoints for the individual else cases. Otherwise you would need to use breakpoint conditions.
I've been thinking about this problem for some time, but i just can't think of a solution without having to write duplicate code. The problem in part c# and part pseudo-code:
bool test = true;
if (test == true)
{
if(first condition) {code}
}
else
{
if(different condition) {same code as above)
}
I have to use this part in a performance intensive part of my program and i'd have to transfer 3 big parameters, which is why i'd rather not use a method.
Is there another way to solve this?
if((test && firstCondition) || (!test && differentCondition)) {
//code
}
if ((test && first_condition) || (!test && different_condition)) {
callSomeFunction();
}
I'd do it like this:
// create an inline function to capture the
Action workAction = () => { //work; }
bool test = true;
if (test == true)
{
if(first condition) {workAction(); }
}
else
{
if(different condition) {workAction(); )
}
Depending on the complexity of the conditions, this approach can sometimes help:
bool doBigCall = false;
if (test1)
{
if (test2)
{
doBigCall = true;
}
else
{
// ...
}
}
else
{
// ...
}
if (doBigCall)
{
// write the big bit of code just once
}
Please find the following code and help me write a better if...else code. I feel this is a very below average way to write else if.
{
Retrieve the number in focus.
string number= getnumber();
string zipcode;
int corporate;
bool bCoverageInBet = false;
try
{
//Get the address and zipcode of the number
GetAddress(number, out address);
if (adress!= null)
{
zipcode = adress.zipcode
//if the following are null means this is first time call
if (!(string.IsNullOrEmpty(_loadedZipcode)) && _address != null)
{
if (zipcode.Equals(_loadedZipcode))
{
if (adress.Equals(_address ))
{
if (focusChanged)
{
return result;
}
}
else
{
if (bCoverageInBet)
{
// case 2: Different address and different coverage which is in between, make a call anf get new valus for result
//return the new result
}
else
{
return //current result value;
}
}
}
}
else
{
_loadedZipcode = zipcode;
_address = adress;
GetResponse( out resp)
{
if ((resp != null))
{
bool isCorporate = false;
corporate = getValues();
if (corporate .Equals(100))
{
result = true;
return result;
}
else if (corporate > 0 && corporate < 100)
{
//Make a call to get corporate
bCoverageInBet = true;
LocationResponse objResults;
if (GetAddressbycorporate(out objResults, out errMsg))
{
if (objResults != null)
{
isCorporate = objResults.located;
if (isCorporate )
{
result = true;
}
}
}
}
return result;
}
return result;
}
else
{
DisplayError("No response ");
return result;
}
}
}
else
{
//To do: What is address comes null
}
}
catch (System.Exception ex)
{
//some ccode
}
return result;
}
Thanks
K
Refactor the method into smaller units as appropriate. Also, return early from the method rather than using else clauses.
E.g. instead of
if (adress!= null)
{
zipcode = adress.zipcode
//if the following are null means this is first time call
if (!(string.IsNullOrEmpty(_loadedZipcode)) && _address != null)
{
}
else
{
return false;
}
}
else
{
return false;
}
Do:
if (adress == null)
{
return false;
}
if (string.IsNullOrEmpty(_loadedZipcode) || _address == null)
{
return false;
}
There are quite a few other problems, but that should make the code cleaner to start with.
I don't think anyone is going to "help" you rewrite this code. However, I can offer some suggestions.
I have found it easier to trace my way down to the inner most if and try to rewrite and work my way backwards (up the chain). Depending on the IF block, it is sometimes easier to break them out into separate methods where appropriate.
Also, don't forget about the conditional operator. It can sometimes be clearer to use that than a whole if else block.
For example, property = (boolean expression) ? (true value) : (false value);
Here is a link to MSDN on it: conditonal operator documentation