Finding experienced mentors and peers might be the most important thing you can do if you want to become a great programmer. They will tell you what books to read, explain the pros and cons of different languages, demystify anything that seems to you like “magic”, help you when you get in a jam, work alongside you to produce great things people want, and challenge you to reach new heights.
Back in 2005, with the release of C# 2.0 standard we got a possibility to pass a variable to the body of an anonymous delegate by capturing it from the current context. In 2008 the C# 3.0 brought us lambdas, user anonymous classes, LINQ requests and much more. Now it January, 2017 and the majority of C# developers are looking forward to the release of the C# 7.0 standard that should provide us a bunch of new useful features. However, there are still old features that need to be fixed. That’s why there are plenty of ways to shoot yourself in the foot. Today we are going to speak about one of them, and it is related with quite an unobvious mechanism of variable capture in the body of anonymous functions in C#.
In 1971, the USSR delivered the first planetary rovers on skis to Mars, whose task was to puncture the surface with a rod (housing a dynamic penetrometer and a radiation densitometer) to see if Mars was solid or liquid dusty. The first probe crashed on November 27; the second soft-landed on December 2 but didn’t manage to get out of the “shell” of the lander, so that attempt didn’t count.
This article explains how you can use functional programming in C#.
Originally C++ was envisioned as a superset of C: the majority of existing C programs should also be valid C++ programs. The standards have since diverged substantially, but even in the old days there were obscure exceptions:
We have successfully created and continue developing PVS-Studio analyzer for C/C++ languages. Over the time, it became clear that many of the diagnostics that we have implemented are not related to a specific programming language, so we decided to apply our experience to another programming language, namely C#. In this article, we are talking about the analysis of Code Contracts project by Microsoft done by our C# analyzer.
The expectation of people with regard to software quality is profoundly unrealistic. It could be because they depend so much on software that anything less than perfect is ‘un-acceptable’.
As is probably known to our readers, PVS-Studio static analyzer is exploring a new development direction – the Linux platform; as you may have noticed from the previous articles, it is doing well. This article shows how easily you can check a project with the help of the Linux version of the analyzer, because the simpler PVS-Studio for Linux is, the more supporters it will have. This time our choice was the CodeLite project. CodeLite was compiled and tested in Linux. Let’s see what results we got.
About two months ago I wrote an article about the analysis of GCC using PVS-Studio. The idea of the article was as follows: GCC warnings are great, but they’re not enough. As proof of my words I showed errors that PVS-Studio was able to find the GCC code. A number of readers have noticed that the quality of the GCC code, and its diagnosis, aren’t really great; while Clang compiler is up to date, of high quality, and fresh. In general Clang is awesome! Well, apparently, it’s time to check LLVM project.
Starting to plan the port of your project to a 64-bit system, you must be able to estimate the amount of work and material costs. Let us consider those components that make up the total cost of creating a 64-bit software product. Continue reading