socialsecurity | Visualization about how Social Security calculates

Since you defined a non-default constructor, the compiler will not generate a default constructor, see https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/language/default_constructor for more info. To solve this, see default constructor not generated?.

I would not make this decision based on performance. I would make the decision based on security considerations and access rules.

In almost all circumstances I can think of, you would want separate tables for customers and employees. You could have a third table, persons, for common attributes such as names and addresses. That said, there are so many differences between the two, that I'm not even sure that is a good idea:

• Customers could be incorporated entities such as companies.
• Customers could be from anywhere in the world, but it is reasonable in many situations to assume that employees are local.
• Employees have dependents.
• You may maintain information such as gender, race, and age that you would not want to maintain about customers.

Those are just a few items that immediately come to mind. There are many other differences.

I have several remarks about this code. This code is using C-style arrays, and passing it as pointers and pointer size, which is ill-advised. Also, It doesn't use some of the most basic concepts of C++.

I have made some rearrangements - mostly made Employee into a real struct/class, with its own member functions, instead of passing it from outside. Made the array using the std::array (which is preferable over the raw array), and finally, a small touch - made the number of employees a constexpr.

I haven't arranged the input parsing, but actually, Employee needs to be a class, that disallows touching the values of its members from outside, and should have a constructor, which gets all the relevant inputs, instead of what is done now.

Look at this rearranged code:

Try escaping the quotation marks in your CONCAT.
The fact that your error says that "'CONCAT(w.firstName'" is not a valid column indicates to me that your DB believes the SELECT ends there.

I have managed to solve my issue.

My HTML for the table remained the same, as follows:

If you update state, never use the current state array or object: we always have to create a new structure and update the state with that. So, in your 'StopTyping' method (which should be renamed to 'taxValueChangeHandler', really!), say:

You seem to be dealing with Windows Forms here, as your main class is a Form. To start things off, I would like to recommend against giving Forms names that are completely unrelated to them. I have the habit of naming the main forms of my applications MainForm, but you could also use, for example, MyAppForm (the name of your application plus the word Form).

Setting that aside, if you need to access a control on your form (such as a TextBox), I recommend that you do so within the Form class itself, unless you have an excellent reason to do so. You will not be able to reference things from outside the form class (as controls are Private), and even if you write a method to pull the controls from your Form, you won't be able to access them (they will be on a different thread), unless you implement an algorithm to get around that.

Therefore, I suggest that you move your GetInfo method to your form class. Notice that that class is a partial class, that means you can create a new class file with the same class name and it will extend your form class, better organizing things (this is what Designer code generation does, hence why you're not supposed to alter things on the Designer file).

Edit: Additionally, as suggested above, if the context of your form doesn't suit your method, you can also pass the data required by a control via an extra public acessible method. That extra method can be called by your Form event, for example.

Note: Be sure to define the class as partial on the other file as well, if you intend to do this.

Add a hidden input:

Ahh, its been a full day struggling to get this one and the solution is too simple.

To let it work, I created the softassert object inside the Test method instead of defining at class level, not sure how it affects but its working fine now.