Strign.Format -- where is the reference?

[mortb]

I'd like to build a URL using String.Format
String.Format(" http://server.com/page.aspx?id={0 }{1:\&optionalP arameter=0;&}",
id, optionalParam);
The idea is that I want to exclude the &optionalparamt er=value part of the
string when optionalParam is negative.
I've tried to place nothing after the semicolon blank but that outputs
(strange?) the minus sign to the url string.
The help in MSDN points to a description of VB6 format function and that
gives me no help (could microsoft pelase update this?).

Any help appreciated!
thanks,
mortb

[Dennis Myrén]

I do not think there is a direct way to do that.
You could, however, do something like:

string.Format(" http://server.com/page.aspx?id={0 }{1}"
, id
, 0x0 <= optionalParamet er
? string.Concat(" &optionalParame ter=", optionalParamet er.ToString())
: string.Empty);

--
Regards,
Dennis JD Myrén
Oslo Kodebureau
"mortb" <mortb1<noospam <@hotmail.com > wrote in message
news:OS******** ******@TK2MSFTN GP11.phx.gbl...

I'd like to build a URL using String.Format
String.Format(" http://server.com/page.aspx?id={0 }{1:\&optionalP arameter=0;&}",
id, optionalParam);
The idea is that I want to exclude the &optionalparamt er=value part of the
string when optionalParam is negative.
I've tried to place nothing after the semicolon blank but that outputs
(strange?) the minus sign to the url string.
The help in MSDN points to a description of VB6 format function and that
gives me no help (could microsoft pelase update this?).

Any help appreciated!
thanks,
mortb

[Jon Skeet [C# MVP]]

<"mortb" <mortb1<noospam <@hotmail.com >> wrote:

I'd like to build a URL using String.Format
String.Format(" http://server.com/page.aspx?id={0 }{1:\&optionalP arameter=0;&}",
id, optionalParam);
The idea is that I want to exclude the &optionalparamt er=value part of the
string when optionalParam is negative.
I've tried to place nothing after the semicolon blank but that outputs
(strange?) the minus sign to the url string.
The help in MSDN points to a description of VB6 format function and that
gives me no help (could microsoft pelase update this?).

I must say, this is quite an odd way of going about formatting.
However, you can get it to work. Try this for the format string:

{1:'&optionalPa rameter='0;''}

--
Jon Skeet - <sk***@pobox.co m>
http://www.pobox.com/~skeet
If replying to the group, please do not mail me too

[Jon Skeet [C# MVP]]

Dennis Myrén <de****@oslokb. no> wrote:

I do not think there is a direct way to do that.
You could, however, do something like:

string.Format(" http://server.com/page.aspx?id={0 }{1}"
, id
, 0x0 <= optionalParamet er
? string.Concat(" &optionalParame ter=", optionalParamet er.ToString())
: string.Empty);

Note that a more readable (and entirely equivalent) way of writing the
last parameter would be:

optionalParamet er >= 0 ? "&optionalParam eter="+optional Parameter : ""

The C/C++-like habit of avoiding putting variables on the left hand
side of comparisons in order to avoid accidental assignment is
unnecessary in C# (aside from for booleans, where I find it's rare to
see "x==true" or "x==false" rather than just "x" or "!x").

--
Jon Skeet - <sk***@pobox.co m>
http://www.pobox.com/~skeet
If replying to the group, please do not mail me too

[mortb]

I could not agree more!
/mortb

"Jon Skeet [C# MVP]" <sk***@pobox.co m> wrote in message
news:MP******** *************** *@msnews.micros oft.com...
Dennis Myrén <de****@oslokb. no> wrote:

I do not think there is a direct way to do that.
You could, however, do something like:

string.Format(" http://server.com/page.aspx?id={0 }{1}"
, id
, 0x0 <= optionalParamet er
? string.Concat(" &optionalParame ter=", optionalParamet er.ToString())
: string.Empty);

Note that a more readable (and entirely equivalent) way of writing the
last parameter would be:

optionalParamet er >= 0 ? "&optionalParam eter="+optional Parameter : ""

The C/C++-like habit of avoiding putting variables on the left hand
side of comparisons in order to avoid accidental assignment is
unnecessary in C# (aside from for booleans, where I find it's rare to
see "x==true" or "x==false" rather than just "x" or "!x").

--
Jon Skeet - <sk***@pobox.co m>
http://www.pobox.com/~skeet
If replying to the group, please do not mail me too

[mortb]

I must say, this is quite an odd way of going about formatting.
However, you can get it to work. Try this for the format string:

{1:'&optionalPa rameter='0;''}

Thank you!

cheers,
mortb

[Dennis Myrén]

Jon Skeet wrote:

Note that a more readable (and entirely equivalent) way of writing the
last parameter would be:
optionalParame ter >= 0 ? "&optionalParam eter="+optional Parameter : ""
Thank you for pointing that out for me.

I am very aware of that fact though.
This is coming down to a matter of favour of coding styles.
I personally like to place constants on the left
even if i could place them on the right side.

I think System.String.C oncat is prettier
than "manual" string concatenation using operator +.
That is why i always use that instead.
The only exception is when the strings concatenated is constant strings,
because then the compiler is free to optimize the statement by actually
concatenating them during compilation, and I do not think that is the case
with String.Concat.

This is the second time you are noticing me of the constants on the left
thing.
I interpret that as you do not want me to use that syntax in code posts.
I will try to avoid it from now on.
By the way, the {1:'&optionalPa rameter='0;''} solution was nice!

--
Regards,
Dennis JD Myrén
Oslo Kodebureau
"Jon Skeet [C# MVP]" <sk***@pobox.co m> wrote in message
news:MP******** *************** *@msnews.micros oft.com...
Dennis Myrén <de****@oslokb. no> wrote: I do not think there is a direct way to do that.
You could, however, do something like:

string.Format(" http://server.com/page.aspx?id={0 }{1}"
, id
, 0x0 <= optionalParamet er
? string.Concat(" &optionalParame ter=", optionalParamet er.ToString())
: string.Empty);

Note that a more readable (and entirely equivalent) way of writing the
last parameter would be:

optionalParamet er >= 0 ? "&optionalParam eter="+optional Parameter : ""

The C/C++-like habit of avoiding putting variables on the left hand
side of comparisons in order to avoid accidental assignment is
unnecessary in C# (aside from for booleans, where I find it's rare to
see "x==true" or "x==false" rather than just "x" or "!x").

--
Jon Skeet - <sk***@pobox.co m>
http://www.pobox.com/~skeet
If replying to the group, please do not mail me too

[Dennis Myrén]

I understand you are very grateful for me answering your question.(..... .)

--
Regards,
Dennis JD Myrén
Oslo Kodebureau
"mortb" <mortb1<noospam <@hotmail.com > wrote in message
news:%2******** *******@TK2MSFT NGP09.phx.gbl.. .

I could not agree more!
/mortb

"Jon Skeet [C# MVP]" <sk***@pobox.co m> wrote in message
news:MP******** *************** *@msnews.micros oft.com...
Dennis Myrén <de****@oslokb. no> wrote:

I do not think there is a direct way to do that.
You could, however, do something like:

string.Format(" http://server.com/page.aspx?id={0 }{1}"
, id
, 0x0 <= optionalParamet er
? string.Concat(" &optionalParame ter=", optionalParamet er.ToString())
: string.Empty);

Note that a more readable (and entirely equivalent) way of writing the
last parameter would be:

optionalParamet er >= 0 ? "&optionalParam eter="+optional Parameter : ""

The C/C++-like habit of avoiding putting variables on the left hand
side of comparisons in order to avoid accidental assignment is
unnecessary in C# (aside from for booleans, where I find it's rare to
see "x==true" or "x==false" rather than just "x" or "!x").

--
Jon Skeet - <sk***@pobox.co m>
http://www.pobox.com/~skeet
If replying to the group, please do not mail me too

[Jon Skeet [C# MVP]]

Dennis Myrén <de****@oslokb. no> wrote:

Jon Skeet wrote:

Note that a more readable (and entirely equivalent) way of writing the
last parameter would be:
optionalParame ter >= 0 ? "&optionalParam eter="+optional Parameter : ""
Thank you for pointing that out for me.

I am very aware of that fact though.

Goodo.
This is coming down to a matter of favour of coding styles.
I personally like to place constants on the left
even if i could place them on the right side.
Fair enough, although I think most people find it less readable that
way.
I think System.String.C oncat is prettier
than "manual" string concatenation using operator +.
Again, I think most people would disagree with you in terms of
readability. That's entirely your prerogative though - I'm certainly
not going to try to tell you what *you* find more readable :)
That is why i always use that instead.
The only exception is when the strings concatenated is constant strings,
because then the compiler is free to optimize the statement by actually
concatenating them during compilation, and I do not think that is the case
with String.Concat.
Indeed.
This is the second time you are noticing me of the constants on the left
thing.
I interpret that as you do not want me to use that syntax in code posts.
I will try to avoid it from now on.
Feel free to keep doing it - I wasn't sure whether you were just doing
it from C/C++ habits unnecessarily though. (I don't keep track of who
I've explained it to :) I'm certainly in no position to demand people
format their code in a particular way (although if they're asking me a
question it helps if they make it readable).
By the way, the {1:'&optionalPa rameter='0;''} solution was nice!

I'm not sure I'd actually use the word "nice" here - it's a solution
which is relatively hard to read, IMO, but it seems to be the way the
OP wanted to play things.

--
Jon Skeet - <sk***@pobox.co m>
http://www.pobox.com/~skeet
If replying to the group, please do not mail me too

[mortb]

But of course :)

But as I am not a big fan of writing hex values in my source I think parm <
0 is more readable.
It tells me more about what the intention was when I wrote the code and thus
it decreases the time to "re-understand" the code some seconds when I open
the file to fix some bugs.

cheers,
mortb

"Dennis Myrén" <de****@oslokb. no> wrote in message
news:gZ******** **********@news 4.e.nsc.no...

I understand you are very grateful for me answering your question.(..... .)