Skip to main content
15 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Apr 11, 2017 at 3:35 history edited user113093 CC BY-SA 3.0
added 288 characters in body
Oct 5, 2015 at 7:46 audit First posts
Oct 5, 2015 at 13:51
Sep 7, 2015 at 15:57 vote accept CommunityBot
Sep 7, 2015 at 8:41 comment added phresnel Refactoring imposes many compromises and sometimes even paradoxons. E.g. w.r.t. loose coupling vs. DRY, or short functions, but many thereof, vs. longer functions, and few thereof. In the end, it's a difficult beast: Your target is readability and maintainability. You need to think as an avatar that sees your code for the first time. And sometimes you just try out to see what's better. Perfect refactoring unfortunately is not possible.
Sep 7, 2015 at 2:37 history tweeted twitter.com/#!/StackProgrammer/status/640715554425323520
Sep 7, 2015 at 0:39 comment added Davislor Okay, thought there was probably a reason.
Sep 7, 2015 at 0:39 comment added user113093 @WinstonEwert I will look into that. I am not sure I want to do that for all C#/VB.NET types, though.
Sep 7, 2015 at 0:38 comment added user113093 @Lorehead Typically I would do that, but this is a single method being passed a type which contains the node as a payload from an internal method I have no control over.
Sep 7, 2015 at 0:35 comment added Davislor Sorry if this is obvious, but generics exist so you don’t have to repeat yourself for code that’s identical but for type. If that’s not what you meant, please disregard.
Sep 7, 2015 at 0:26 comment added Winston Ewert Would it work to create your own AttributeSyntax interface that wraps the existing classes but gives you the inheritance which conceptually should be there?
Sep 7, 2015 at 0:18 answer added durron597 timeline score: 111
Sep 7, 2015 at 0:15 history undeleted user113093
Sep 7, 2015 at 0:14 history deleted user113093 via Vote
Sep 7, 2015 at 0:08 review First posts
Sep 7, 2015 at 22:01
Sep 7, 2015 at 0:05 history asked user113093 CC BY-SA 3.0