this post was submitted on 28 Oct 2024
504 points (98.3% liked)

Programming Humor

2662 readers
3 users here now

Related Communities !programmerhumor@lemmy.ml !programmer_humor@programming.dev !programmerhumor@kbin.social !programming_horror@programming.dev

Other Programming Communities !programming@beehaw.org !programming@programming.dev !programming@lemmy.ml !programming@kbin.social !learn_programming@programming.dev !functional_programming@programming.dev !embedded_prog@lemmy.ml

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] just_an_average_joe@lemmy.dbzer0.com 107 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

Wait areBooleanEqual returns false when they are equal?

[–] breadsmasher@lemmy.world 79 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] not_woody_shaw@lemmy.world 10 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

That's not even the worst part. What the fuck does a function named Compare_anything do? Does it return anything? It sounds like nothing but a side effect.

[–] idunnololz@lemmy.world 11 points 2 weeks ago

Usually comparison functions are supposed to return an integer and are usually useful for sorting. However this one returns a bool so it's both useless and terribly named.

[–] BatmanAoD@lemmy.world 7 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

The unnecessary and confusing functions are horrible, yes, but I'd still say that the fact that they're wrong is the "worst" part.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] bleistift2@sopuli.xyz 84 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

Don’t forget the invocation

if (CompareBooleans(a, b) == true)
[–] magic_lobster_party@fedia.io 59 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

if (CompareBooleans(CompareBooleans(a, b), true))

[–] TriflingToad@lemmy.world 10 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I don't like this thread anymore :(

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] MyTurtleSwimsUpsideDown@fedia.io 18 points 2 weeks ago

elseif(CompareBooleans(b,a) != false)

[–] becausechemistry@lemm.ee 57 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Management: Gee whiz, we really have no idea how to gauge productivity to decide who gets promoted. We could manage. Or, better, we could just have someone write a script that pulls info from git on how many lines of code each person has written.

Programmers:

[–] curiousaur@reddthat.com 22 points 2 weeks ago (4 children)

I promote based on lines of code removed.

[–] DontRedditMyLemmy@lemmy.world 26 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I quit based on idiotic metrics

[–] curiousaur@reddthat.com 5 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

Ah, the idiotic idiotic metric metric.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] carl_dungeon@lemmy.world 53 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

There’s no way, that’s so insane it has layers.

[–] Ledivin@lemmy.world 18 points 2 weeks ago

At first, I thought the shitty methods were the joke 😱😱😱

[–] aiden@lemm.ee 50 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

This is code after working 16 hours

[–] Maalus@lemmy.world 11 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I'd give my right hand this is a code review problem. Someone extracted a method returning true false. Then an intern came along and was told to refactor. They saw a lot of comparisons and "extracted" them.

[–] nitefox@sh.itjust.works 7 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

My coworker made an array of book to express a status. This is no doing of an intern but a much eviler force at play.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] AbsoluteChicagoDog@lemm.ee 34 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

"You aren't writing enough lines of code!" - Management

[–] LovableSidekick@lemmy.world 8 points 2 weeks ago

My boss's boss, a former Ops manager who liked to keep track of system stats, once asked her why the CPU usage on the dev box had decreased that month. Weren't the devs doing any work?

[–] Grandwolf319@sh.itjust.works 30 points 2 weeks ago

Two wrongs don’t make a right, but sometimes in programming, two bugs can cancel each other out.

Whoever wrote this is more than capable of using it incorrectly.

[–] Acters@lemmy.world 21 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (6 children)

Those are rookie lines of code numbers right there.
I would have done it without the ==

internal static bool AreBooleansEqual(bool orig, bool val)
{
    if(orig) 
    {
        if(val)
            return false
        return true
    }
    if(val)
        return true 
    return false
}

Don't know why their code returns false when they are equal but I'm not going to dig through old code to refactor to use true instead of false.

[–] Xanvial@lemmy.world 9 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

you can also use XOR operation

return (X || Y) && !(X && Y)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
[–] Omega_Jimes@lemmy.ca 21 points 2 weeks ago

Is this part of Elons "How many lines of choice have you written?" interview?

[–] cyborganism@lemmy.ca 18 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

You can tell they're amateurs. It's not obfuscated enough. They won't be able to keep their job.

[–] Serinus@lemmy.world 19 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

They clearly need an abstract boolean comparison factory.

[–] marcos@lemmy.world 21 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)
var CompareBooleans = new ComparatorFactory().BooleanComparator(new BooleanComparisonByEqualityPolicy());
if (CompareBooleans(a, b) == true) {
     System.Out.PrintLn("Sames!!!");
}

...

But now that I've written this, it's C#, so it's missing dependency injection.

[–] magic_lobster_party@fedia.io 6 points 2 weeks ago

I can imagine Uncle Bob be proud of this Clean Code (TM)

[–] magic_lobster_party@fedia.io 18 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

My guess to why there’s two functions is because it was originally only internal, and the programmer realized they needed public as well, but changing internal to public is too scary so they created a new method instead.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Elgenzay@lemmy.ml 17 points 2 weeks ago (10 children)
[–] Jerkface@lemmy.world 7 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

It's dependent on is-odd which is dependent on is-number which has 88 million weekly downloads...

load more comments (9 replies)
[–] mlg@lemmy.world 17 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

"We need to obfuscate our code to prevent reverse engineering"

The obfuscation in question:

[–] Wrench@lemmy.world 5 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

We affectionately called it "subscurity" on the FE team.

When our BE apis would not give us any information why something failed, nor would they give us access to their logs. Complete black box of undocumented doodoo, and they would proudly say "security through obscurity" every time we asked why they couldn't make improvements to usability.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] zarkanian@sh.itjust.works 16 points 2 weeks ago

If this were a Node module, I wouldn't even be surprised.

[–] marx2k@lemmy.world 14 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Clearly it should be return orig == val

Duh

[–] offspec@lemmy.world 34 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

To match the current behavior it should be orig != val

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Moah@lemmy.blahaj.zone 12 points 2 weeks ago

I'm a bit disappointed there isn't a call to GetBooleanValue in there

[–] j4k3@lemmy.world 9 points 2 weeks ago

!NOT

Who's there?

!!Naughty Knots

[–] DmMacniel@feddit.org 8 points 2 weeks ago

But how do you test for FILE_NOT_FOUND?

[–] thenextguy@lemmy.world 8 points 2 weeks ago

Where are the unit tests?

[–] Treczoks@lemmy.world 7 points 2 weeks ago

Straight from the famous book "Making LOCs for Dummies"

[–] angrystego@lemmy.world 6 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I misread it as CompareBolians. No more Star Trek memes for me today.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] LovableSidekick@lemmy.world 6 points 2 weeks ago
load more comments
view more: next ›