Databases
StackOverflow2013
Postsdbo
PO
 

Note that there are some explanatory texts on larger screens.

plurals
  1. PO
    primarykey
    data
    text
    <p>First of all, be very <strong>attentive</strong> when reading such "anti" campaigns. </p> <ul> <li>Ask yourself if <em>Anti IF</em> campaign would like eliminate the <strong><em>logic</em></strong> in the applications?!</li> <li>The ideas could have a good application in <em>one</em> situation and a stupid in <em>another one</em>. <em>Be reasonable.</em></li> <li>It may be possible that <em>multiple</em> usage of <strong>IF</strong> may encumber the reader of the code. but this is <em>any</em> reason to eliminate the <strong>if</strong> from your code, more that than, this is almost impossible. </li> <li>By the way anywhere in the MS design guidelines is indicated do not use <strong>if</strong> (like is done, by e.g. for the <strong>goto</strong> statement usage of witch is not recommended)...</li> </ul> <p>C#</p> <pre><code> switch (myStringVar) { case "one": doSomething(); break; case "two": doSomething(); break; case "three": doSomething(); break; default: doSomething(); break; } </code></pre> <p>Finally, it reduces this code to the <strong>if</strong> s... so, only for readability is better, not for performance.</p> <p>Actually, if Microsoft believes that switch (in c#) is better to replace with if's - OK, I will use (in the concrete situation that you described) the <strong>switch</strong>.</p> <p>By the way, it seems that the campaign responds to your question very clear <a href="http://www.antiifcampaign.com/articles/the-simplest-anti-if-code.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">in this example</a></p>
    singulars
    1. This table or related slice is empty.
    1. POdo this without using an "if" | if(s == "value1"){...} else if(s == "value2") { ...}
      singulars
      1. PTQuestion
    1. PTAnswer
    1. USserhio
    1. USserhio
    plurals
    1. This table or related slice is empty.
    1. This table or related slice is empty.
    1. This table or related slice is empty.
    1. This table or related slice is empty.
    1. VO
      singulars
      1. PO
      1. This table or related slice is empty.
      1. VTUpMod
    2. VO
      singulars
      1. PO
      1. This table or related slice is empty.
      1. VTUpMod
    3. VO
      singulars
      1. PO
      1. This table or related slice is empty.
      1. VTUpMod
    1. COThe point is to remove the *conditional* logic, not replace ifs with similar language constructs.
      singulars
      1. PO
      1. USR. Martinho Fernandes
    2. CO:) no, switch also is no good
      singulars
      1. PO
      1. USOmu
    3. CO@Martinho: I got the point. Finally if Microsoft believes that IF could be replaced by something else, they could replace the switch implementation. This code, however, facilitates the readability, so I don't see any worry about do not using the conditional logic in the given example.
      singulars
      1. PO
      1. USserhio
 

Querying!

 
Guidance
A row detail

Detail views are divided into sections. All the information in the data section comes from columns in the selected row. The other sections display data from other, related rows.

Related data can be related in a to-one or a to-many fashion. Captions of data related in a to-many fashion link to a list view showing a filtered view of the table.

Try moving around until you find a non-empty to-many entry and click on the label to get to one. You can move back to the root by clicking on the database name in the header.

SQuiL has stopped working due to an internal error.

If you are curious you may find further information in the browser console, which is accessible through the devtools (F12).

Reload