我在读c++老师的课堂笔记,他是这样写的:
使用缩进// OK
永远不要依赖运算符优先级-总是使用括号// OK
总是使用{}块-即使是单行//不可以,为什么??
Const对象在比较的左边// OK
对>= 0的变量使用unsigned,这是个不错的技巧
删除后将指针设置为NULL -双重删除保护//不错
第三种方法我不清楚:放一行进去能得到什么
A{…} ?
例如,下面这段奇怪的代码:
int j = 0;
for (int i = 0 ; i < 100 ; ++i)
{
if (i % 2 == 0)
{
j++;
}
}
将其替换为:
int j = 0;
for (int i = 0 ; i < 100 ; ++i)
if (i % 2 == 0)
j++;
使用第一个版本的好处是什么?
我能想到的最贴切的例子是:
if(someCondition)
if(someOtherCondition)
DoSomething();
else
DoSomethingElse();
Which if will the else be paired with? Indentation implies that the outer if gets the else, but that's not actually how the compiler will see it; the inner if will get the else, and the outer if doesn't. You would have to know that (or see it behave that way in debugging mode) to figure out by inspection why this code might be failing your expectations. It gets more confusing if you know Python; in that case you know that indentation defines code blocks, so you would expect it to evaluate according to the indentation. C#, however, doesn't give a flying flip about whitespace.
话虽如此,从表面上看,我并不特别同意这个“总是使用括号”的规则。它使代码的垂直噪声非常大,降低了快速读取代码的能力。如果语句是:
if(someCondition)
DoSomething();
... then it should be written just like this. The statement "always use brackets" sounds like "always surround mathematical operations with parentheses". That would turn the very simple statement a * b + c / d into ((a * b) + (c / d)), introducing the possibility of missing a close-paren (the bane of many a coder), and for what? The order of operations is well-known and well-enforced, so the parentheses are redundant. You'd only use parentheses to enforce a different order of operations than would normally be applied: a * (b+c) / d for instance. Block braces are similar; use them to define what you want to do in cases where it differs from the default, and is not "obvious" (subjective, but usually pretty common-sense).
我正在处理的代码库被那些病态地厌恶大括号的人分散在代码中,对于后来的人来说,它确实可以对可维护性产生影响。
我遇到的最常见的问题是:
if (really incredibly stupidly massively long statement that exceeds the width of the editor) do_foo;
this_looks_like_a_then-statement_but_isn't;
所以当我出现并希望添加一个then语句时,如果我不小心,我很容易以这样的方式结束:
if (really incredibly stupidly massively long statement that exceeds the width of the editor) do_foo;
{
this_looks_like_a_then-statement_but_isn't;
i_want_this_to_be_a_then-statement_but_it's_not;
}
考虑到添加大括号需要1秒左右的时间,并且可以为您节省至少几分钟的调试时间,为什么不选择减少歧义性呢?在我看来这是虚假的节约。
除了一些明显的情况外,我在任何地方都使用{}。单行是其中一种情况:
if(condition) return; // OK
if(condition) //
return; // and this is not a one-liner
当你在返回之前添加一些方法时,它可能会伤害你。缩进表示当条件满足时执行return,但它总是返回。
c#中using语句的其他例子
using (D d = new D()) // OK
using (C c = new C(d))
{
c.UseLimitedResource();
}
这相当于
using (D d = new D())
{
using (C c = new C(d))
{
c.UseLimitedResource();
}
}
我必须承认,我并不总是在单行中使用{},但这是一种很好的练习。
假设你写的代码没有括号,看起来像这样:
For (int I = 0;I < 100;+ + i)
For (int j = 0;J < 100;+ + j)
DoSingleStuff ();
过了一段时间,你想在j循环中添加一些其他东西,你只是通过对齐来做,忘记添加括号。
Memory deallocation is faster. Let’s say you have a big scope and create big arrays inside (without new so they are on the stack). Those arrays are removed from memory just after you leave the scope. But it is possible that you use that array in one place and it will be on the stack for a while and be some kind of rubbish. As a stack have limited and quite small size, it is possible to exceed the stack size. So in some cases it is better to write {} to preventing that. Note that this is not for a single line, but for such situations:
if (...)
{
//SomeStuff...
{//we have no if, while, etc.
//SomeOtherStuff
}
//SomeMoreStuff
}
The third way to use is similar to the second. It is just not to make the stack cleaner, but to open some functions. If you use mutex in long functions usually it is better to lock and unlock just before accessing data and just after finishing reading/writing that. Note: This way is used if you have some of your own class or struct with a constructor and destructor to lock memory.
What is more:
if (...)
if (...)
SomeStuff();
else
SomeOtherStuff(); // Goes to the second if, but alignment shows it is on first...
总而言之,我不能说,总是使用{}的最佳方式是单行,但这样做并没有什么不好。
如果你编写的是编译代码,但是如果你的代码是被解释的,那么你的代码就会非常非常慢。非常轻微。
当你完成它时,最好将指针设置为NULL。
下面是一个例子:
A类行为如下:
分配一块内存
然后一段时间后,它删除这块内存,但不将指针设置为NULL
B类做以下事情
分配内存(在这个实例中,它得到的内存块恰好与类a删除的内存块相同)
在这一点上,类A和类B都有指向同一个内存块的指针,就类A而言,这块内存块不存在,因为它已经用完了。
考虑以下问题:
如果在类a中有一个逻辑错误,导致它写入现在属于类B的内存呢?
在这个特定的实例中,您不会得到一个糟糕的访问异常错误,因为内存地址是合法的,而类A现在有效地破坏了类B数据。
类B可能最终崩溃,如果它遇到意外值,当它崩溃时,很有可能,当问题出现在类a时,您将花费相当长的时间在类B中查找这个bug。
如果您已经将删除的内存指针设置为NULL,那么只要类A中的任何逻辑错误试图写入NULL指针,您就会得到一个异常错误。
如果您担心在指针第二次为NULL时使用双重删除会出现逻辑错误,那么可以为此添加assert。