Sign Up

Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.

Have an account? Sign In

Have an account? Sign In Now

Sign In

Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.

Sign Up Here

Forgot Password?

Don't have account, Sign Up Here

Forgot Password

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.

Have an account? Sign In Now

You must login to ask a question.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.

Sign InSign Up

The Archive Base

The Archive Base Logo The Archive Base Logo

The Archive Base Navigation

  • SEARCH
  • Home
  • About Us
  • Blog
  • Contact Us
Search
Ask A Question

Mobile menu

Close
Ask a Question
  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Feed
  • User Profile
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Buy Points
  • Users
  • Help
  • Buy Theme
  • SEARCH
Home/ Questions/Q 7218583
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: May 28, 20262026-05-28T21:30:07+00:00 2026-05-28T21:30:07+00:00

I’ve recently inherited a .Net Web App with a 4 layer setup. As per

  • 0

I’ve recently inherited a .Net Web App with a 4 layer setup. As per normal with these situations, I have no documentation and no contact with the prior devs. The members of previous team for the app had vastly different habits, and I’m trying to sort through these as I refactor/standardize the code. I ran into something I haven’t seen before (and I’m not able to find anywhere or anyone implementing this as a practice ) in which one/many of the developers wrap all DataSets in a using statement as it’s returned through the layers. As soon as I saw it I wanted to junk it. In many of these implementations the readability is shot. Then I started questioning myself because I can’t imagine someone doing this just because. I understand the desire to dispose of objects as they’re used, but this just seems like someone went overboard. Does anyone know of a solid reason to keep this implemented?

Here’s a little TLDR example of what’s being done.

Presentation:

using (DataSet ds = objCustomerFBO.FetchCustomerInfo(base.KeyID))
{
    grdCustomerInfo.DataSource = ds;
}
grdCustomerInfo.DataBind();

Object:

public DataSet FetchCustomerInfo(int keyID)
{
    using (DataSet ds = objCustomerEBO.FetchCustomerInfo(keyID);
    {
         return ds;
    }
}

Business:

public DataSet FetchCustomerInfo(int keyID)
{
    SqlParameter arrSqlParam = new SqlParameter[1];
    arrSqlParam[0] = new SqlParameter("@CustomerID", SqlDbType.Int);
    arrSqlParam[0].Value = keyID;

    using (DataSet ds = CommonEBO.ExecuteDataSet("FetchCustomerInfo", arrSqlParam);
    {
         return ds;
    }
}

Data (after filtering through overloads):

public static DataSet ExecuteDataSet(string strCommandText, SqlParameter[] SqlParams, CommandType commandtype, string strConnectionString)
    {
        DataSet ds = new DataSet();
        try
        {
            using (SqlDataAdapter oAdpt = new SqlDataAdapter(CMSOnlineDH.CreateCommand(strCommandText, SqlParams, commandtype, strConnectionString)))
            {
                oAdpt.SelectCommand.Connection.Open();
                oAdpt.Fill(ds);
            }
        }
        catch { throw; }
        return ds;
    }
  • 1 1 Answer
  • 0 Views
  • 0 Followers
  • 0
Share
  • Facebook
  • Report

Leave an answer
Cancel reply

You must login to add an answer.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

1 Answer

  • Voted
  • Oldest
  • Recent
  • Random
  1. Editorial Team
    Editorial Team
    2026-05-28T21:30:07+00:00Added an answer on May 28, 2026 at 9:30 pm

    I don’t see the point in the using statements that wrap around a return of the instantiated object. These I would remove as it just hinders readability.

    The first example doesn’t make much sense either – since calling DataBind will need to operate over the bound DataSet, doing the binding outside of the using statement makes very little sense. I would have put that within the using statement.

    The only usage that appears correct to me is with the DataAdapter (last example).

    In all it looks like someone took the advice to always use using statements for objects implementing IDisposable a bit overboard.

    • 0
    • Reply
    • Share
      Share
      • Share on Facebook
      • Share on Twitter
      • Share on LinkedIn
      • Share on WhatsApp
      • Report

Sidebar

Related Questions

I have a string like this: La Torre Eiffel paragonata all’Everest What PHP function
link Im having trouble converting the html entites into html characters, (&# 8217;) i
That's pretty much it. I'm using Nokogiri to scrape a web page what has
I have just tried to save a simple *.rtf file with some websites and
I have a jquery bug and I've been looking for hours now, I can't
this is what i have right now Drawing an RSS feed into the php,
Seemingly simple, but I cannot find anything relevant on the web. What is the
I have a French site that I want to parse, but am running into
I'm parsing an RSS feed that has an ’ in it. SimpleXML turns this
We're building an app, our first using Rails 3, and we're having to build

Explore

  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Users
  • Help
  • SEARCH

Footer

© 2021 The Archive Base. All Rights Reserved
With Love by The Archive Base

Insert/edit link

Enter the destination URL

Or link to existing content

    No search term specified. Showing recent items. Search or use up and down arrow keys to select an item.