I have just stumbled on a beautiful example of a double negative in our code. We have a function that returns a list of object, and it takes a “filterFunction” as a parameter:<\/p>\n
\r\nList<Apple> GetApples(Function<Apple,bool> filterFunction)\r\n<\/pre>\nThe trouble is, filterFunction<\/strong>\u00a0works as exclusion\u00a0<\/em>function:\u00a0is is supposed to return\u00a0true<\/strong> for objects to be thrown out, and\u00a0false<\/strong> for objects to be kept in the list. So, effectively, instead of saying “give me only red apples” you have to say “don’t give me apples that are not red”. Logically it’s the same thing, but human brain is not\u00a0designed to easily handle double negatives.<\/p>\n
For this reason, I always ask people not to use variable names like “IsNotValidUser” where “false” designates a valid user, and “true” means an invalid user. A flag named “IsValidUser” with reversed values is much easier to understand. However, I’ve never seen the “is not” logic applied to filter functions before. Maybe it has something to do with popularity of functional programming…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"