 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
.NET Forum / ASP.NET / General / March 2008using string instead of int
Often in code, when retrieving a value from table where I don't have to do any math calculations, I store the value in a string variable instead of converting to an int and then storing in an int variable. Do you guys see anything wrong with this practice? And the value in the table is ? IMO it's best to always work with the intended type (that is int if your database column is an int).... > Often in code, when retrieving a value from table where I don't have to do > any math calculations, I store the value in a string variable instead of > converting to an int and then storing in an int variable. > > Do you guys see anything wrong with this practice? > > Often in code, when retrieving a value from table where I don't have to do > > any math calculations, I store the value in a string variable instead of > > converting to an int and then storing in an int variable. > > > Do you guys see anything wrong with this practice? It's an inefficient way to store an integer. A string requires more memory and requires more complex (compiled) code to handle it. So it makes no sense to do it just for the sake of it. > Often in code, when retrieving a value from table where I don't have to do > any math calculations, I store the value in a string variable instead of > converting to an int and then storing in an int variable. I guess there's nothing intrinsically wrong with it, but I can't imagine why you would want to do this...  SignatureMark Rae ASP.NET MVP http://www.markrae.net Other than math calculations, sorting will definitely be a problem, since text is sorted much differently than numbers For instance 111 will come before 20, when sorting by text David Wier http://aspnet101.com http://iWritePro.com - One click PDF, convert .doc/.rtf/.txt to HTML with no bloated markup > Often in code, when retrieving a value from table where I don't have to do > any math calculations, I store the value in a string variable instead of > converting to an int and then storing in an int variable. > > Do you guys see anything wrong with this practice? Just to avoid unneccary Convet.ToInt32, while retrieving from an Int type column in table. > Other than math calculations, sorting will definitely be a problem, since > text is sorted much differently than numbers [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > > > Do you guys see anything wrong with this practice? > Just to avoid unneccary Convet.ToInt32, while retrieving from an Int type > column in table. [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] >> > >> > Do you guys see anything wrong with this practice? General rule of thumb. Do your database design. If a field is numeric then use a number type. Don't mix presentation and data. Designing a database for presentation sake will eventually come back to bite you and it is much simpler to fix the presentation layer than your data. LS No, the data in the tables is still <B>int</B> or whatever. I'm talking about when retrieving in .aspx code. > > Just to avoid unneccary Convet.ToInt32, while retrieving from an Int type > > column in table. [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > > LS > No, the data in the tables is still <B>int</B> or whatever. I'm talking > about [quoted text clipped - 35 lines] >> >> LS Sorry I am talking about database tables. LS Humm how do you retrieve the data ? You shouldn't have to convert. You may want to post a new thread about your original issue... Actually I never even thought about not having the correct mapping (and I don't even remember to have heard about doing such a thing)... It has a potential to cause loads of problem (comparison, sort, type checking etc...) or at best you'll have to change your code as soon as you wan't to do actually something with this data + the conversion even if you have to do one is not that a huge issue... I would really use the correct mapping between the client side variables and the server side data. As said earlier I suspect you have an earlier issue you may want to post about... -- Patrice > Just to avoid unneccary Convet.ToInt32, while retrieving from an Int type > column in table. When your database column has an "int" type, you can easily do something like: DataRow dr = MyDataSet.Rows[0]; int i = (int)dr["MyIntColumn"]; but this will fail if there are "null"s in that column (the field will then contain a DbNull.Value). In that case use this: int ?i2 = dr["MyIntColumn"] as int?; Hans Kesting mavrick_101 explained : > Just to avoid unneccary Convet.ToInt32, while retrieving from an Int type > column in table.
Free MagazinesGet these publications absolutely FREE for up to 12 months. There are no hidden fees and no obligation. Simply choose a title, complete the application form and submit it. Read more ...
|
Reply to this Message
|
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.