C# Fundamentals Skill Check - Full App in 1 Video with just 62 lines of code!

Practice your fundamental C# skills by building a complete application in just 62 lines of code. This complete app will test your skills in 10 key C# skills, including raw string literals, do loops, while loops, inline if statements, and more.
Full Course: www.iamtimcore...

[@umer.on.youtube]

Damn, COREY --- you beauty! You're the man! A legend for us C Sharpers !!!!!

[@IAmTimCorey]

Thanks!

[@umer.on.youtube]

@@IAmTimCorey What platforms do you suggest for interactive learning? For newer stuff like Blazor and MAUI. Also, please create some courses on MAUI and Blazor (forgetting about older versions of Blazor and focusing only on the latest things like the new template that allows to write once, run on Web, Mobile, Desktop, as previously web was missing).

[@ramansehdev8235]

This is awesome. Foundation is key.

[@IAmTimCorey]

Thanks!

[@trustingod0]

Hey Tim. I was wondering do you have any video covering debugging?

[@michaelnorris2522]

You aren't there yet! How about checking what happens when a negative number is entered? I added a && clause to the evaluation of validGuess. Another tiny thing - how about {guessCount} guess{(guessCount == 1 ? "" : "es")} to make it more like writing "guess(es)"? Great video, though, and much appreciated.

[@IAmTimCorey]

I was ok with people entering negative guesses. At that point, you are punishing yourself. The way to "win" is to get the lowest number of guesses. Going backwards won't win you anything. It will just increase your guess count. As for the guess suggestion, yep, you could do that.

[@devoiddude]

Very nice video Tim, I found this really helpful, thank you, just one question, how come you don't separate the code into individual methods?

[@IAmTimCorey]

Why would we need the additional complexity of methods?

[@IreneSmith]

I'm curious why your do while loop test isn't while(!validGuess) which does the same thing and, in this context should be completely clear.

[@IAmTimCorey]

We don't test validGuess before we've put a "real" value into the variable. Otherwise, we can accidentally never go through the while loop because we set it to the "wrong" initial value. That's why we have a do loop. So we can set the validGuess variable with real data, not just starter data, before we test it.

[@IreneSmith]

@@IAmTimCorey The initial value of a boolean is false.Since it is a do loop, we know it will run at least once, so why write out != false when !false does the same exact thing. Tell me how that's any different. I'm not just trying to argue, I want to understand what the difference is.

[@IAmTimCorey]

Ah, I see. I thought you were saying to use a while loop instead of a do loop. Instead, if I understand you now, you were saying that we could write "!validGuess" instead of "validGuess == false". That's a good question. The reason is because code is meant to be read by humans. When you are reading code, especially when you are quickly scanning it, the bang character (!) is easy to miss. So then it looks like you are looping if they give a valid guess rather than an invalid guess. By saying "== false", it is much easier to see. The compiler treats it the same, but it is easier to see as a human. I've seen people introduce bugs a number of times because they missed the bang character somewhere and thought the statement did the opposite of what it actually does.

[@NaftuliSinger]

56:21 Why did it set the currentValue to 0 and not to 1 as specified for null values in your code at line 15?

[@IAmTimCorey]

Because it wasn't a null value. It was an empty string. An empty string is not null, so it tests it to see if it can convert the empty string to an integer. When it cannot, it returns false (which we are ignoring), and it sets the value of the integer to zero. Thus, zero for our first guess.

[@NaftuliSinger]

​@@IAmTimCoreySo in which case would it actually add 1 (as specified in ?? "1") ?

[@ChrisRS7]

@@NaftuliSinger Try F6 and hit "Enter"

[@IAmTimCorey]

@NaftuliSinger - No, because that is a null check. Like I said, it isn't null. Since it isn't null, it uses the value we gave it from the console, not the fallback value. Therefore, it is zero.

[@NaftuliSinger]

@@IAmTimCorey Gotcha

[@OneIdeaTooMany]

Code is meant to be read by humans said no python expert ever...

[@IAmTimCorey]

😂

[@aron-gx9mh]

it would be nice to have a shorter version of your tutorials. maybe without explaining anything just right the code in ten minutes and explain as minimal as possible. long versions are good too but can drain my energy

[@IAmTimCorey]

I have a whole series called 10-minute training. You can find the playlist on this channel.

[@keyser456]

His 10-minute series is actually pretty amazing. Great for introductions (and sometimes more) to every relevant topic.

[@IAmTimCorey]

Also, just so you know, if you have the DevPass (or if you buy this course), this video is broken up into short videos. I believe this section is 12 videos instead of the one it is on KZbin. The other three apps are the same way. Most lessons are under 10 minutes.

[@adam4733]

😂

[@IAmTimCorey]

?

[@studentsheaven-d8v]

hh...that NOPE is message from users to the developer, am I joke to you. loving it

[@IAmTimCorey]

😀

[@عروضوهميزات-ل5غ]

Hello Tim how to register in your website to buy a course ?

[@IAmTimCorey]

No need to register. Just go to the course and click buy. It will set up the accounts you need automatically.

[@anddav123]

Not used to ””” always used @“ for literal string, is it right assume it equal to the same thing?

[@IAmTimCorey]

No, they aren't the same thing. The verbatim string literal (@ symbol) allows for single-line literal strings. You can do multi-line, but it is messy. You also have to escape double quotes still. The verbatim string literal (""" characters) allow you to easily do multi-line and you do not need to escape double quotes. Also, if you decide that you want to have two double quotes in a row, you can use four double quotes to start and end the raw string literal.

[@anddav123]

@@IAmTimCorey thanks for your reply, good to know

[@gurudaki]

Nice work!Is this video for beginners?

[@IAmTimCorey]

Beginners can absolutely do this, although people with more experience will still find value in it as well.

[@ramansehdev8235]

Are there more courses coming like this to test foundational knowledge?

[@IAmTimCorey]

Not just foundational knowledge, but yes.

[@ramansehdev8235]

@@IAmTimCorey music to my ears. Coming across your channel in 2018 was the best thing for my professional career.

[@Zakaria_TheWolf]

Amazing Lessons ✅ the $"" "" "" "" "" "" Is The Most Information Value That I learn Today Thank You

[@IAmTimCorey]

I am glad it was helpful.