33 parameters for a function?! Seriously!?

Cornstalks · 2013-06-18T05:29:01

Would you ever write or use a function that takes 33 parameters? And how can you help someone see that 33 is just too many? Even though all 33 are absolutely needed, how can you help them see that passing a single object containing all the needed info would be better? Background info/story: I'm at work ("working," of course) and my boss recently had me make an API change to an SDK we're making. He does the Java version of the SDK, and I do the C++. Basically he (and others) decide how it's going to be, then he does it in Java and gives it to me to turn into C++. He just gave me a function that takes 33 arguments. 33! Most of them are strings, but there is a healthy(?) mix of ints, floats, and enums, and they are in no particular order. It's horribly confusing. And this isn't the first time. There was a Java function they had me clean up that probably had about 30ish parameters (I cut it in half but still, why?). I suggested making a struct or class that contains all the necessary parameters that we pass into the function. That way we can get all 33 parameters we need but only pass 1 object to the function. He agreed but said "the guys" (dunno who they are... his management maybe?) like to use parameters and were pretty stiff about it. He said it was probably so it could work with legacy code and that "the guys" say objects cause portability issues. Ummm... portability issues? I'm not buying that one. The object would be 100% portable. And it's a static library so there aren't the DLL issues either. And I'm definitely not buying the legacy code thing, since this is a brand new SDK we're making. There is no legacy code. Anyway, it's hard to use (and maintain) a function with 33 arguments, especially when they usually change every week when the API gets updated. I like my boss; I don't blame him for the parameter mess. He's a smart guy. So I tell myself I blame his boss. Is this normal? Do most work places do this (by "this" I mean use a ridiculous amount of arguments for a function)? [Edited by - MikeTacular on January 9, 2009 4:06:38 PM]

Coding Horrors Community

Started by Cornstalks January 09, 2009 03:39 PM

54 comments, last by Krohm 10 years, 11 months ago

Cornstalks

7,033

Author

January 09, 2009 05:49 PM

Quote:Original post by janta
For a good laugh, turn that function into a variadic one.

Hahaha now that is tempting.

I just had a nice little chat with my boss and a coworker. My boss is all for using a struct/class, but my coworker isn't. He likes having a lot of parameters. He says it's like a shopping list. He also says there would be alignment issues between C and C++. But we're using C++ objects in the API (like std::string and std::vector)... how do I tell him that we aren't even targeting C? And as for possible alignment errors with C++, how do I combat him on that? Surely if there are alignment errors they'll show up in more than the struct we would be passing for that function? So why worry so much about that one struct that would simplify life so, so mch? And we're delivering libraries for all our targeted compilers and platforms, so that shouldn't be an issue. Someone give me some ammo for his alignment issues argument :)

[size=2][ I was ninja'd 71 times before I stopped counting a long time ago ] [ f.k.a. MikeTacular ] [ My Blog ] [ SWFer: Gaplessly looped MP3s in your Flash games ]

ukdeveloper

264

January 09, 2009 05:51 PM

33 parameters sounds like a severe design WTF if you ask me. Personally, I consider six to be too many.

owl

376

January 09, 2009 05:57 PM

Quote:Original post by MikeTacular
He likes having a lot of parameters. He says it's like a shopping list.

Oh come on! LOL!

[size="2"]I like the Walrus best.

polymorphed

272

January 09, 2009 06:05 PM

Quote:Original post by MikeTacular
He also says there would be alignment issues between C and C++.

He's wrong. Structs are aligned in the exact same way in C/C++. You can change the alignment to 1, 2, 4 or 8 bytes with compiler #pragmas anyway. You should ask him what he means specifically by "alignment errors".

while (tired) DrinkCoffee();

janta

345

January 09, 2009 06:16 PM

But why does you function need 33 inputs anyway? Couldn't you split that up, avoiding the many parameters vs. single struct argument entirely? I've never needed so many arguments in a function! Your program is crazy :)

Way Walker

745

January 09, 2009 07:23 PM

Quote:Original post by polymorphed
Quote:Original post by MikeTacular
Is this normal?

Nope. The normal thing would be to just pass a pointer/reference to an object containing said 32 arguments. I can't imagine why you'd have any portability issues with plain objects, unless you're planning to port it to FORTRAN. [smile]

Even then, I usually write a wrapper function or macro for the FORTRAN function which takes a struct or two as arguments.

d000hg

1,208

January 09, 2009 08:01 PM

Quote:Original post by MikeTacular
I just had a nice little chat with my boss and a coworker. My boss is all for using a struct/class, but my coworker isn't. He likes having a lot of parameters.

Who cares, it is your task and your boss is happy, just do it your way and if the coworker really whinges, tell him he's welcome to add an override that takes the parameters individually.

But, 33 is nothing.

ukdeveloper

264

January 09, 2009 08:06 PM

Quote:Original post by d000hg
But, 33 is nothing.

LOL, I remember that one. It sounds terrible for me to say this, but I hope someone lost their job over that abomination.

Cornstalks

7,033

Author

January 09, 2009 08:58 PM

SUCCESS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! WOOHOO!!! After my coworker talked to another coworker today, he consented to letting a class be build with accessor methods that we could pass to the function instead of the 34 parameters. Finally! Hopefully management is cool with it too. And I was all ready to rate the 34-parameter function in WTFs/min (obligatory link for those who don't know the reference).

For those who are curious as to what our 34 parameters were, here's the function's declaration (hopefully I don't get in trouble for posting this):

uploadAsset(Application::ApplicationType application, const std::string& applicationVersion,            const std::string& pathToAsset, const std::string& pathToShortPreview,             const std::string& pathToMainThumbnail, const std::string& pathToSummaryThumbnails,            const std::string& shortName, const std::string& description,            const std::string& frameRate, int width, int height, const std::string& audioDataRate,            const std::string& videoDataRate, Asset::AudioBitRateMode audioBitRateMode,            Asset::VideoBitRateMode videoBitRateMode, float videoDuration, const std::string& presetXML,            const std::string& fileType, const std::string& filter, const std::string& audioCodec,            const std::string& videoCodec, const std::string& authorName, const std::string& sourceFileName,            const std::string& sourceFileType, const std::string& sourceAudioCodec,            const std::string& sourceVideoCodec, const std::string& sourceFrameRate, int sourceWidth,            int sourceHeight, const std::string& sourceAudioDataRate,            Asset::AudioBitRateMode sourceAudioBitRateMode, const std::string& sourceVideoDataRate,            Asset::VideoBitRateMode sourceVideoBitRateMode,            bool (*progressCallback)(float))

Imagine trying to call that function off the top of your head haha!

[edit]

Just saw your post d000hg, and that function is a true, bona fide nightmare.

[size=2][ I was ninja'd 71 times before I stopped counting a long time ago ] [ f.k.a. MikeTacular ] [ My Blog ] [ SWFer: Gaplessly looped MP3s in your Flash games ]

polymorphed

272

January 09, 2009 09:16 PM

Quote:Original post by d000hg
But, 33 is nothing.

Hmm. Wow. I'm genuinely surprised that the person who wrote that code was able to operate a keyboard.

while (tired) DrinkCoffee();

33 parameters for a function?! Seriously!?

This topic is closed to new replies.

Popular Topics

Recommended Tutorials

33 parameters for a function?! Seriously!?

This topic is closed to new replies.

Popular Topics

Recommended Tutorials

Reticulating splines