The Weird and The Wonderful

16-Mar-17 6:26

Because Javascript equality is so f*cked that you have to know when to use == vs. ===, and even then there's some weird BS with the null, empty, void, dunno, you're guess is as good as mine states that a Javascript variable can be in that it only makes sense to equate to a literal string?

Marc

Latest Article - Merkle Trees

Learning to code with python is like learning to swim with those little arm floaties. It gives you undeserved confidence and will eventually drown you. - DangerBunny

Artificial intelligence is the only remedy for natural stupidity. - CDP1802

Sigh

Marc Clifton10-Mar-17 7:41

10-Mar-17 7:41

for (int i = 0; i < foo.Length; i++)
{
  addFlag = true;
  if (oldFoo != null)
  {
    for (int j = 0; j < oldFoo.Length; j++)
    {
      if (foo[i].Guid == oldFoo[j].Guid)
      {
        addFlag = false;
      }
    }
  }
  if (addFlag)
  {
    newFooList.Add(foo[i]);
  }
}

I should start holding code review classes with "WTF is wrong with this pyle of shyte".

Marc

V.A.P.O.R.ware - Visual Assisted Programming / Organizational Representation

Learning to code with python is like learning to swim with those little arm floaties. It gives you undeserved confidence and will eventually drown you. - DangerBunny

Artificial intelligence is the only remedy for natural stupidity. - CDP1802

Eddy Vluggen10-Mar-17 9:00

Eddy Vluggen

10-Mar-17 9:00

Marc Clifton wrote:
I should start holding code review classes with "WTF is wrong with this pyle of shyte".

Too much accolades, right? I also added another for-loop, since you were going through the items in the wrong order.

for (<span int i = 0; i < foo.Length; i++)
{
  addFlag = true;
  if (oldFoo != null)
    for (int j = 0; j < oldFoo.Length; j++)
      for (int d = oldFoo.Length; d > 0; d++)
         if (foo[i].Guid == oldFoo[j].Guid)
           addFlag = false;

  if (addFlag)
    newFooList.Add(foo[i]);
}

Semantically also incorrect, since "addFlag" is unknown at the start. The code should reflect that by using a nullable bool that is set to nothing. That way, you could determine (if an exception occurs) if the bool is unknown, true, or not very true.

Roll eyes | :rolleyes:

Bastard Programmer from Hell Suspicious | :suss:

If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]

Marc Clifton12-Mar-17 5:06

12-Mar-17 5:06

Eddy Vluggen wrote:
for (int d = oldFoo.Length; d > 0; d++)

There's at least 3 bugs in that one line! Wink | ;)

Marc

Bernhard Hiller12-Mar-17 22:29

Bernhard Hiller

12-Mar-17 22:29

You can improve performance by adding a ";" after "for (int d = oldFoo.Length; d > 0; d++)". But I guess a smart guy like you introduced this possibility for exactly that purpose. Let's hope the compiler did not detect that and optimized it away... Big Grin | :-D

User 1106097910-Mar-17 9:47

User 11060979

10-Mar-17 9:47

Dont't blame the people, try to help them Big Grin | :-D

If I Review some of my 30 year old code, a lot of time I'm asking me if I would know the guy who wrote this s**t Laugh | :laugh:

[Edit]
The same happens also with code I wrote just before some days Blush | :O

modified 19-Jan-21 21:04pm.

Marc Clifton12-Mar-17 5:04

12-Mar-17 5:04

0x01AA wrote:
Dont't blame the people, try to help them

They're no longer here and were in India.

0x01AA wrote:
If I Review some of my 30 year old code, a lot of time I'm asking me if I would know the guy who wrote this s**t

A client is still using code I wrote in C++ 25 years ago. I grimace every time I see DataMatrix, basically the .NET version of DataTable.

Marc

KarstenK16-Mar-17 5:37

KarstenK

16-Mar-17 5:37

The answer is: YES

"Share your wisdom and enlight the clueless". It is good for your karma Blush | :O

Press F1 for help or google it.
Greetings from Germany

AnvilRanger17-Mar-17 7:42

AnvilRanger

17-Mar-17 7:42

And the answer to your question would be, but I found it on stackoverflow.

Plamen Dragiyski30-Mar-17 22:16

Plamen Dragiyski

30-Mar-17 22:16

You cannot see the deeper meaning here. It is not user-friendly to make it too efficient[^].

It's too complicated to understand

JackPeacock31-Mar-17 2:42

JackPeacock

31-Mar-17 2:42

This is why we need faster and faster processors. Think of it as price support for Intel.

Marc Clifton28-Feb-17 4:13

28-Feb-17 4:13

//This is a bad way to merge in the dropdown info in terms of performance in the skins, but this code is too complicated to understand.
//I know this will work

Followed by some counter increments.

D'Oh! | :doh:

Marc

Brisingr Aerowing28-Feb-17 5:19

Brisingr Aerowing

28-Feb-17 5:19

Code was changed but comment wasn't? Or comment was copied from somewhere else and never edited? Or the developer was suffering from hypocaffenation?

Or whoever wrote that was a complete idiot?

What do you get when you cross a joke with a rhetorical question?

The metaphorical solid rear-end expulsions have impacted the metaphorical motorized bladed rotating air movement mechanism.

Do questions with multiple question marks annoy you???

jeron128-Feb-17 5:27

jeron1

28-Feb-17 5:27

Kind of reminds me of one one Jeff Spicoli, on fixing a car.

Quote:
Relax, all right? My old man is a television repairman, he's got this ultimate set of tools. I can fix it.

"the debugger doesn't tell me anything because this code compiles just fine" - random QA comment
"Facebook is where you tell lies to your friends. Twitter is where you tell the truth to strangers." - chriselst
"I don't drink any more... then again, I don't drink any less." - Mike Mullikins uncle

raddevus28-Feb-17 5:50

raddevus

28-Feb-17 5:50

comment said:
//I know this will work

// Note to self: do not make notes to self in comments in code.

CDP180213-Mar-17 22:56

CDP1802

13-Mar-17 22:56

raddevus wrote:
// Note to self: do not make notes to self in comments in code.

Right. Use the third person instead.

The language is JavaScript. that of Mordor, which I will not utter here

This is Javascript. If you put big wheels and a racing stripe on a golf cart, it's still a f***ing golf cart.

"I don't know, extraterrestrial?"
"You mean like from space?"
"No, from Canada."

If software development were a circus, we would all be the clowns.

KarstenK16-Mar-17 5:39

KarstenK

16-Mar-17 5:39

I write often comment for my "future self" like "HACK", "TODO" Roll eyes | :rolleyes:

Press F1 for help or google it.
Greetings from Germany

Bernhard Hiller28-Feb-17 21:51

Bernhard Hiller

28-Feb-17 21:51

//You are not expected to understand this.

Nathan Minier1-Mar-17 1:24

Nathan Minier

1-Mar-17 1:24

That reads like a Daily Affirmation with Stuart Smalley. Brilliant!

"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics."
- Benjamin Disraeli

virang_212-Mar-17 17:13

virang_21

2-Mar-17 17:13

#region Note To Future Developer
/* NOTE TO FUTURE DEVELOPER */

/* You might look at below line of code and wonder why this is done this way. You are already
 checking for order type in download process. Business has done politician level backflip  on the last day of UAT
 on the original logic and wanted to check if they have created 2 COs with same job number and first is already processed
 next one needs to be regen. Download would have it as a new code.
 If this requirement was known from the beginning this logic would have been totally different.
 This logic makes download process pretty redundant as you may have called APIs when CO is scanned and get data from M3
 and do rest of the checking. */



#endregion

Zen and the art of software maintenance : rm -rf *

Maths is like love : a simple idea but it can get complicated.

MarkTJohnson6-Mar-17 4:31

MarkTJohnson

6-Mar-17 4:31

At my first job we had a senior developer who was very into OOP. Only problem is the code base was Microsoft C 5.1. The guy was building C code like it was C++ classes, few people could follow it. After he moved on to bigger and better things I got to debug some of his stuff and found a comment like

"We aren't supposed to free() the same pointer twice but since it doesn't hurt anything"

Coming from Mister High and Mighty "Your code better conform and produce no warnings." WTF | :WTF:

Jon McKee6-Mar-17 7:59

Jon McKee

6-Mar-17 7:59

MarkTJohnson wrote:
We aren't supposed to free() the same pointer twice but since it doesn't hurt anything

Oh my, that is a very dangerous assumption I've seen people make before.

//First
char* data = (char*)malloc(100 * sizeof *data);
free(data);
data = NULL;
free(data);

//Second
char* data = (char*)malloc(100 * sizeof *data);
free(data);
free(data);

First one isn't going to cause problems. Calling free on an allocated pointer de-allocates that memory. Calling free on a null pointer doesn't do anything. But calling free on a non-null, de-allocated pointer as in the second example de-allocates the memory again which has undefined behavior. Another process or thread could have allocated that memory before the 2nd de-allocation. Now you've invalidated memory another program was using.

modified 6-Mar-17 14:08pm.