In the past when I have written classes and constructors, I named the variables in the constructor parameter something different than what would have been stored in the actual class itself.What I do now is name them the same, and reference the internal variables with Me.varname.Here is a class I just started building.Is my naming convention incorrect? [code]
View 1 Replies
I have a class (let's call it foo) that has several public properties.
private _fee as object
private _fie as object
private _fo as object
[Code]....
So far this seems to work... I'm just worried that something might get screwed up scope wise.
What is the normal way someone would name the constructor variables in a class like this?
In the code below, the namespace is called "Navigation" which I think is correct. Then I have a class called "Heading", which by definition is the direction a person/vehicle is truly pointing towards. I think that is also named correctly. In the code below, I have four things I have named:
_WhatToName1, WhatToName2, WhatToName3, and WhatToName4.
The value that gets passed in and stored is a double between 0 and 360 -- essentially the degree value from a circle. For WhatToName3 and WhatToName4, I have seen a lot of places that just use "value" as the name. Is that standard?
Namespace Navigation
Public Class Heading
Private _WhatToName1 As Double
Public Sub New(ByVal WhatToName3 As Double)
Me.WhatToName2 = WhatToName3
[Code] .....
What is the most commonly used convention (in C# and VB) to name object, when I want to emphesize that it is an instance of class that implements some interface. Like here:
//is iDisp correct name?
protected void Dispose(IDisposable iDisp)
{
iDisp.Dispose();
Console.WriteLine("Disposed");
}
I am trying to convert visual basic 6 code to vb net. How do you in Visual basic .net get the universal naming convention.
View 8 RepliesHow can I link to a file automatically based on some naming convention , example the application should link to a pdf file when it finds like the below combination : " ...... some text .... ammended by Rule 80/85 published in 05/12/2000" so the application should link to the file named R_80/85_05/12/2000 (R for Rule) if the file is available it should link if not it will stay normal
View 3 RepliesI have run across exam ples of how to create code for getting the universal naming convention for mapped drive in VB6 and access but that don't work in VB net.
View 4 RepliesI have an abstract class which requires a delegate to function. I pass the delegate into the constructor. Now that I have a non default constructor I need to call the abstract class's constructors from the concrete class which means that I need to use MyBase.New(...). I have included a quick example below.
Public MustInherit Class BaseClass
Public Delegate Sub WorkMethod()
Private _Work As WorkMethod
[code]....
I have tried to do this but I keep getting the following error: "Implicit reference to object under construction is not valid when calling another constructor".Can I not do what I am trying to do above? I initially had the delegate setup in its own setter method. But then I am creating a deceptive API because it does require a point to a method to work properly.
Can some one please be kind enough to link me m$ naming guide lines.
View 2 RepliesI am generally not one to engage in subjective arguments over matters like variable naming, code formatting, etc. So I have no intention of starting an argument here.I just came across this (old) blog post which recommends not prefixing member variable names:
[Code]...
I get it: member variables can be lower camelCase, and public properties/methods can be PascalCase. But VB.NET is case-insensitive, so you can't really give a private member the same name as a public property except with a lower case first letter.I've generally prefixed member variables with an underscore, but I've been told that's not idiomatic.
So really I'm just curious: how do you name your member variables in VB.NET? And is there a "standard" way?
I'm not asking because I believe there's a "right" way or because I particularly want to change my style, and certainly not because I have any desire to tell others they're "wrong." Like I said, I'm just curious.
In the pseudo code below, if I have two classes and I want one class to be initialized in the other class without the name having to be different, how would I accomplish this?
'==Car.vb==
Public Class Car
Public Model as New Car.Model()
[Code]...
Is there a better way of doing this so I get the result I want for my usage code?
'==ASPX page==
Dim c as New Car()
c.Model = Car.Model.Types.BMW
I have some classes, BsfciFile and StudyFlashCard. Bsfci is the extension to which I save my set of flashcards in an INI format. I am currently working to transform my code from using Windows API calls to access the INI to using a IniFile class that I found on the internet. I would like the BsfciFile to have a Array of StudyFlashCard objects, but I would like the StudyFlashCard class to use the IniFile class object contained in the BsfciFile class. I can pass the IniFile from the BsfciFile class to the constructor for the StudyFlashCard class, but I want it to modify the same IniFile as the BsfciFile class has later on.
[Code]...
comparing C# code and VB.NET and the results between the seemingly identical code were entirely different.(Why C# is always winning over VB.NET?)The explanation given is that C# will initialize the class fields, then call the base constructor, but VB.NET does the exact opposite. Is there a technical reason for the languages to be different? At first glance, it seems that either approach is equally valid, but I can't fathom why they wouldn't have selected the SAME approach.
EDIT: As 'Jeffrey L Whitledge' has pointed out, VB6 did not have inheritance, so I don't think we can say 'to keep VB.NET and VB6 more closely related'.
I'm relatively new to .NET and am wondering how people handle naming their private variables and the public properties that access them. Like if you want to be able to just read it, but not write to it.
[Code]...
So far I've taken to putting a 'l' (for local) in front of the all the private variables so as to be able to use the full name for the property. Is there a better way around this, or do you just always have to have different names for private variable/public properties? If so, what sort of conventions do people use?
Its not a huge deal, its just a minor annoyance and I was wondering if I was missing something.
[code].....
View 1 RepliesI have a little banking console app for a class project. I've created a class (Account). What I want to do is name the instance of the class based on text input:
Dim strFoo As String
strFoo = Console.Readline
Dim strFoo as New Account
Obviously this won't work because strFoo is a String.
After debugging a particularly tricky issue in VB.NET involving the order in which instance variables are initialized, I discovered that there is a breaking discrepancy between the behavior that I expected from C# and the actual behavior in VB.NET.Nota bene: This question concerns a slight discrepancy in the behaviors of VB.NET and C#. If you're a language bigot that is unable to provide an answer other than "that's why you should use C#, noob", there is nothing for you to see here; kindly move along.Specifically, I expected the behavior outlined by the C# Language Specification (emphasis added):
When an instance constructor has no constructor initializer, or it has a constructor initializer of the form base(...), that constructor implicitly performs the initializations specified by the variable-initializers of the instance fields declared in its class. This corresponds to a sequence of assignments that are executed immediately upon entry to the constructor and before the implicit invocation of the direct base class constructor. The variable initializers are executed in the textual order in which they appear in the class declaration.
Contrast that with the portion of the VB.NET Language Specification concerning Instance Constructors, which says (emphasis added): When a constructor's first statement is of the form MyBase.New(...), the constructor implicitly performs the initializations specified by the variable initializers of the instance variables declared in the type. This corresponds to a sequence of assignments that are executed immediately after invoking the direct base type constructor. Such ordering ensures that all base instance variables are initialized by their variable initializers before any statements that have access to the instance are executed.
The discrepancy here is immediately obvious. C# initializes class-level variables before calling the base constructor. VB.NET does exactly the reverse, apparently preferring to call the base constructor before setting the values of instance fields.If you want to see some code, this related question provides a more concrete example of the divergent behavior. Unfortunately, it does not provide any hints as to how one might coerce VB.NET into following the model established by C#.
I'm less interested in why the designers of the two languages chose such divergent approaches than I am in possible workarounds for the problem. Ultimately, my question is as follows: Is there any way that I can write or structure my code in VB.NET to force instance variables to be initialized before the base type's constructor is called, as is the standard behavior in C#?
I am looking for a good resource on variable naming conventions to illustrate variable type and where variables are declared. So I will have public variables, Private variables, private or local variables. I also may want to declare variables with the same name in different class code (i.e. in the code behind different forms). I am assuming good coding would dicatate a prefix for declaration location.
View 4 RepliesI define some global variables of a class as follows:
Private Class MyClass
Private var1 as Decimal
Private list1 as List(Of string)[code].....
But I found that after this form is closed, all above variables, var1, list1, list2 still exist in memory. I thought they should be collected by gc since the form is already disposed as I confirmed.
Add: I have monitored half an hour after the form is closed. But these variables are not collected by gc. I have an automatic update procedure on the form which uses above variables.Since the above variables still hold values, the automatic update procedure is always called which causes exception. (One quick fix is to check if form.isDisposed in update procedure. But I do not think this is elegeant. Besides, these variables occupy memory.)
I'm new in .NET programming.I have a class Form1 that includes Button1_Click event.Button1_Click creates a multiple Text Boxies at run time)Here is the class:
Public Class Form1
Dim shiftDown As Integer
Dim counter As Integer
[code].....
I just would like to know how to implement class constructor in this language.
View 2 RepliesI am trying to make the properties of class which can only be set through the constructor of the same class
View 7 Repliesi'm working with different classes and different constructors. It's working fine until i try to inherit a class that also has a constructor. vb asks for mybase.new but when i add that vb says that a constructor cannot call itself, when i try it in a different way vb asks the parameters of the constructor of the class that i want to inherit.
View 11 Repliesi've declared a bitmap at class level + i want to load an image into that variable in the constructor. i don't know why but it won't work and everything i've tried won't work either.am i missing a reference or something?
[Code]...
I have an abstract class in vb.net with two subclasses. In the abstract class I have a constuctor that looks like this:[code]I would like to create a second constructor that doesn't take any arguments and just initializes the args to default values.[code]When I attempt to create a new subclass using the second constructor the compiler complains that I'm missing two args to the constructor.Is there a reason I can't overload the constructor in the abstract class?
View 2 RepliesI have a custom collection class that I would like to pre-populate with data from the database. Basically it would search for "submembers" that are related to the "member" data record using the "member"'s primary key id.
I figured the best way to do this would be in the constructor of the class, but I am not so sure now. The collection class does not have any properties (the member class does).[code]...
I'm making a class that reads a file and processes data in it, but I need some error handling. I'm giving it a constructor that takes a file location and processes that file. How can I make it so the constructor tells the program whether it found the file or not? Optimistically the program that calls this class would check for that first, but since I'm not going to be the only one that uses this class I'd like to know how to secure such a thing. It's probably bad practice to do this within the class, but I'd like to be sure it's as portable as possible.
View 6 RepliesI discovered that an event raised (directly on indirectly) in the constructor cannot be handled outside the very class. To prove if that was the actual problem, I wrote a simple exemplary app.
Class with the event:
Namespace Utils
Public Class A
Public Event Test()
Public Sub New()
CallTest()
[Code] .....
The reason of such behavior became quite obvious after writing those pieces, but maybe there is a way to omit it?
How do I force the Visual Studio compiler to generate an error when a required method is not being called in the constructor of a child class? Like when you edit the form designer code, the compiler complains when InitializeComponent()isn't the first call in the constructor of a form. Is this even possible in VB.NET?
View 2 RepliesI am trying to write some unit tests on a class that looks like this, using Moq [code] the parameterized constructor is private or internal one of the two methods relies on the result of the other.I want to check that when GetThisOrThat is called with a value, it actually calls GetThis. But I also want to mock GetThis so that it returns a specific well-known value.To me this is an example of Partial Mocking, where we create a Mock based on a class, passing the parameters for the constructor. The problem here is that there is no public constructor, and therefore, Moq can not call it..I tried using the Accessors generated by Visual Studio for MSTest, and use those accessors for the mocking, and this is what I came up with [code]
View 1 Replies
