Printable View
Consider the following:
Can you see why the above just cause a client of mine SIGIFICANT money?Code:public class SomeClass()
{
protected virtual void SpecialWorkerMethod()
{
throw new Exception("Derived Class must Implement this Method");
}
}
hint: The direct cause is directly related to C#, but the ROOT cause can happen in any language.
I'm guessing that this issue didn't show up until run time.
Restructuring the code using interfaces (and maybe constraints) probably would have allowed catching the problem during compile time.
1) Yup, right hile rinning for the client.Quote:
Originally Posted by Arjay
2) in C# abstract ould have been appropriate. In C++ making the method "pure" would have solved the problem at BUILD time.
I'm afraid I don't know, but I'd like to find out. What was the problem?Quote:
Originally Posted by TheCPUWizard
Simple. Somebody (no longer employeed by the client company because he also wrote the faulty base class) forgot to override a method in a derived class, that the base class was not setup to catch this at compile time.Quote:
Originally Posted by goatslayer
It seems a bit rough to sack someone over this : after all testing should have shown this up.
We all make mistakes occasionally... don't we ? :D
Darwen.
If a mistake costs $3 million dollars (yes, actual amount), then SOMEONE is going to lose their job.Quote:
Originally Posted by darwen
Well, it was probably justified, but with some 'background' which would qualify it. I'm glad it wasn't me... Isn't there still death for 'treason' for gov't workers? :eek:
No kidding ? How did it sum up to $3 million ?? I mean did they loose future sale or they lost agreement or something ?Quote:
Originally Posted by TheCPUWizard
A wise business man once took on a trainee that blew a huge deal costing $11M. The young many went to turn in his resignation and the older business man said, "Boy, I just spent $11M training you. I don't want you to go."Quote:
Originally Posted by TheCPUWizard
That's one mistake they'll NEVER make again!
My client had a delivery commitment. A missed milestone invoked a thirty day penality (they met with their client one per month). When the program was being demonstrated, and blew up, it was deemed "not ready for user acceptance", and the commitment was declared "not met".Quote:
Originally Posted by Krishnaa
What process changes do you plan to make to prevent this sort of thing from happening in the future?
Yikes, I wouldn't wanna have had that guys job... I use C# all the time and I thought it was a hefty method simply because of the exception being thrown and bubbling up the call stack. Also, if it had to be implemented, why didn't he use an interface?
I work for a small company doing all their software, I love my job, but when software development starts to become like boot camp thats when I pack my bags, lol.
You'll never earn very much then... the toughest jobs I've had have also the highest paid.Quote:
I work for a small company doing all their software, I love my job, but when software development starts to become like boot camp thats when I pack my bags, lol.
Darwen.
I dont care about he money :) I just enjoy doing it and having fun
Interesting topic even though I know nothing about C#. :)
Good attitude! I wish I could find a programming job but I'm only in my first year of uni. :(Quote:
Originally Posted by RaleTheBlade
You're obviously not married and have no children then... :DQuote:
I dont care about he money I just enjoy doing it and having fun
Darwen.
Quote:
Originally Posted by darwen
Nope, lol. I was thinking about something today though. If that method had to be implemented, why not just make the prototype in an interface and then implement the interface to force the class to conform?
Wishing doesn't make dreams come true my friend, you have to get out there in the mix and show the man that you want it!Quote:
Originally Posted by Mybowlcut
The person who failed to do the code review? ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by TheCPUWizard
There are plenty of people who have wife/kids and earn a lot less than a software developer.Quote:
Originally Posted by darwen
Another problem with that approach:Quote:
Originally Posted by TheCPUWizard
Isn't it generally good practice to call the base class implementation in the derived implementation?
I'm think of Form.OnLoad, for example.
So if you did that, the base base class implementation would throw that exception!