Code cleanup

Cyrus Blather Code cleanup | Indoor Grills

Cyrus Blather Code cleanup | Indoor Grills — Wed, 03 Jun 2009 09:18:07 GMT

PingBack from http://indoorgrillsrecipes.info/story.php?id=13114

"Sort usings" command is always diabled | keyongtech

"Sort usings" command is always diabled | keyongtech — Thu, 22 Jan 2009 07:46:19 GMT

PingBack from http://www.keyongtech.com/2320265-sort-usings-command-is-always

re: Code cleanup

Adam Hearn — Thu, 09 Feb 2006 22:00:48 GMT

It's definitely a shame to see that the feature was only half added to the IDE :( A small feature but a very welcome one it would have been!

re: Code cleanup

Olivier Fermy — Wed, 23 Nov 2005 12:25:27 GMT

In VS 2005 Relase version, i have found "Sort usings" in "Tools->Customize" in "Edit" category. But when i add the icon in the standard toolbar, it is always disabled ! Have you finally activate these tools ?

smile

Best — Fri, 02 Sep 2005 21:41:05 GMT

u should give us more info

re: Do you

Patrick Steele's .NET Blog — Wed, 23 Mar 2005 11:49:00 GMT

re: Code cleanup

Mark Levison — Wed, 15 Dec 2004 17:23:00 GMT

I would love to see this in Whidbey or as part of the TweakC# tool that you mentioned earlier.

How would we use it? Today I'm oftening tidying up using statements where the code has been updated, so the namespace is no longer in use - but the using statements remain.

In addition no one of my other co-workers are pedantic enough to care about the order using statements.

re: Code cleanup

Cyrus Najmabadi — Mon, 06 Dec 2004 21:10:00 GMT

Frederik: Thanks! That helps a lot.

---

"Whidbey also has the code snippets tool. I tend to use full type names in snippets, because, well, they can end up anywhere in my code and I don't want to bother about the 'using' statements at that time. The Simplify Type Names comes in handy here as well. "

We addressed that problem in whidbey. There is a SimpleTypeName function that you can use with snippets. It's how we make sure that we'll dump the best name for global::System.NotImplementedException into your code.

Check out any of the refactoring snippets and you'll see how to do this.

re: Code cleanup

Frederik — Mon, 06 Dec 2004 20:48:00 GMT

Cyrus: I prefer keeping type names short. I prefer to see "SqlConnection" in my code over "System.Data.SqlClient.SqlConnection", for example. However, it happens to my that I do use the fully qualified name of a type, only to find out later that I use that specific type or more types from the same namespaces quite often in the same class. That's where the Simplify Type Names comes in handy.

Another use scenario is when you copy and paste code - example code, for example, might be using full type names a lot. I did spend time simplifying type names before.

Whidbey also has the code snippets tool. I tend to use full type names in snippets, because, well, they can end up anywhere in my code and I don't want to bother about the 'using' statements at that time. The Simplify Type Names comes in handy here as well.

Does that help you?

re: Code cleanup

Cyrus Najmabadi — Mon, 06 Dec 2004 15:53:00 GMT

Nick: There is no penalty except for added conceptual confusion. Some people ask themselves "why is this using here, do i need it?". Other's prefer code to be as tidy as possible and want to remove as much extraneous information as possible.

The default projects include certain things like System.Collections.Generic because we find that people are always using collections and thus it helps them since the types from those usings will now be in the completion lists.

"I guess I would think there are other issues that are much more worth your time than this. "

Of course. But i did this on my own time jsut for the fun of it.

"By the way, don't ever, ever do incremental compilation for C#... That's one of the things that I hate about VB.NET. I think that if you were to observe C-style programmers (vs. VB-style) that you would find that the majority of them write their brand new code ahead of the compiler... calling functions and classes that don't exist yet, and find incremental compliation to be more of a burden then a help. "

I don't see how increment compilation hurts you here. Could you expand on this? What's wrong with the compiler saying "you're calling a non-existent method, would you like me to generate it for you?"