Coding Horrors: You can gather all your technical debt into one easy framework!

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Serious Hardware/Software Crap > The Cavern of COBOL > Coding Horrors: You can gather all your technical debt into one easy framework!

«‹›1501 »

Zombywuf: Mar 29, 2008

Ryouga Inverse posted:

he claims his "creates" money, too, which is interesting

Does that mean we can blame him for the recession?

Better fetch my broom.

# ? Feb 16, 2010 11:04

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Apr 28, 2024 17:19

TheSleeper: Feb 20, 2003

Ryouga Inverse posted:

he claims his "creates" money, too, which is interesting

Hey, who doesn't want a magic money creating black box? I know I sure as hell would like one.

# ? Feb 16, 2010 20:24

Bozart: Oct 28, 2006; Give me the finger.

TheSleeper posted:

Hey, who doesn't want a magic money creating black box? I know I sure as hell would like one.

Sometimes it kills you though.

# ? Feb 17, 2010 03:50

Scaramouche: Mar 26, 2001; SPACE FACE! SPACE FACE!

I have to fix a few of these every year (hint: guess why it comes up once a year). This is for initializing date/time pickers on windows/web forms using VB.net to by default show a report that spans from a month ago to today:

code:


StartDate.Value = New Date(Now().Year, Now().Month � 1, 1, 0, 0, 0)

# ? Feb 17, 2010 21:52

nullfox: Aug 19, 2008

Scaramouche posted:

I have to fix a few of these every year (hint: guess why it comes up once a year). This is for initializing date/time pickers on windows/web forms using VB.net to by default show a report that spans from a month ago to today:
code:
StartDate.Value = New Date(Now().Year, Now().Month � 1, 1, 0, 0, 0)

Is it because Month is 0 indexed, and in January the result of (Now().Month - 1) is -1?

# ? Feb 18, 2010 07:50

Scaramouche: Mar 26, 2001; SPACE FACE! SPACE FACE!

WildFoxMedia posted:

Is it because Month is 0 indexed, and in January the result of (Now().Month - 1) is -1?

Close, but not quite. It's more that January (1) - 1 = 0. I had to switch them all to using the in-built date.AddMonths(-1) so it would roll under/over properly.

# ? Feb 18, 2010 18:21

Kelson: Jan 23, 2005

Scaramouche posted:

Close, but not quite. It's more that January (1) - 1 = 0. I had to switch them all to using the in-built date.AddMonths(-1) so it would roll under/over properly.

Or use (Now().Month + 10)%12+1, but that won't help with the wrong year... and includes the dreaded modulus!

# ? Feb 19, 2010 04:17

Dessert Rose: May 17, 2004; awoken in control of a lucid deep dream...

I just inherited a codebase where the previous developer had something of a mid-life crisis and disappeared off the face of the earth when it was "about 90%" done.

Not only is it actually probably that close to done, but the code actually looks like it was written by someone who knew what they were doing.

I'm sure I will find a giant coding horror in here somewhere to whack me upside the head, but so far the only one has been that he didn't know that static classes can have constructors.

# ? Feb 19, 2010 06:04

Milotic: Mar 4, 2009; 9CL apologist; Slippery Tilde

Ryouga Inverse posted:

Not only is it actually probably that close to done, but the code actually looks like it was written by someone who knew what they were doing.

I'm sure I will find a giant coding horror in here somewhere to whack me upside the head, but so far the only one has been that he didn't know that static classes can have constructors.

Or maybe he realised that static class constructors are the real horror?

# ? Feb 19, 2010 20:51

UberJumper: May 20, 2007; woop

Ohgod

code:

    return ''.join(map(lambda x: str(x[0]), [(len(list(group)), name) for name,
      group in itertools.groupby(
        ''.join(map(str, map(lambda x: x + 1, self.data)))
        )
      ]))

This converts a list of 1 and -1's into RLE string.

# ? Feb 21, 2010 00:07

Dessert Rose: May 17, 2004; awoken in control of a lucid deep dream...

Milotic posted:

Or maybe he realised that static class constructors are the real horror?

What's wrong with them? I mean, you can't/shouldn't put any logic in them that depends on the state when they're called, but if all you're doing is making a class with a bunch of constant data in it that can't be constructed through basic initializers, what's wrong with it?

The alternative is having some retarded InitializeConstants() call that has to be done in a bunch of different places.

# ? Feb 21, 2010 00:17

Milotic: Mar 4, 2009; 9CL apologist; Slippery Tilde

Ryouga Inverse posted:

What's wrong with them? I mean, you can't/shouldn't put any logic in them that depends on the state when they're called, but if all you're doing is making a class with a bunch of constant data in it that can't be constructed through basic initializers, what's wrong with it?

The alternative is having some retarded InitializeConstants() call that has to be done in a bunch of different places.

You can get into headaches if your static constructors reference other static classes with their own static constructors. Also in .NET at least, you have no control over when it executes. And if the constructor throws an exception, it will not and cannot be called again, and then your app domain is a bit hosed.

I'd rather use some form of factory / singleton pattern, and perform the initialisation either when the method is first accessed, or just at the start of the application/main loop/whatever. At least you can re-call your setup code if an exception occurs.

# ? Feb 21, 2010 02:06

Infinite Recursion: Mar 26, 2008; Try this trick and spin it, yeah
Your head will collapse
But there's nothing in it

Two instances that made us want to throw our computers out the window in frustration (both Java):

Mine:

code:

while (x < someVal);
{
    someFunction(params);
    x++;
}

And another from a friend (these forums' VorpalBlade):

code:

func(val)
{
    if(!recursion_stop);
    {
        func(val + 1);
    }
    return;
}

At least he got a stack overflow to indicate what was going wrong with his; mine just continued happily executing forever. Took us hours to figure out the problem, and the simplicity of the solution made it even worse. :bang:

# ? Feb 23, 2010 05:06

RussianManiac: Dec 27, 2005; by Ozmaugh

I don't get it. Did someVal or x get affected by someFunction call?

# ? Feb 23, 2010 06:25

TOO SCSI FOR MY CAT: Oct 12, 2008; this is what happens when you take UI design away from engineers and give it to a bunch of hipster art student "designers"

RussianManiac posted:

I don't get it. Did someVal or x get affected by someFunction call?

This is an infinite loop:

code:

int x = 0;
while (x == 0);
{
  x = 1;
}

# ? Feb 23, 2010 06:33

Infinite Recursion: Mar 26, 2008; Try this trick and spin it, yeah
Your head will collapse
But there's nothing in it

RussianManiac posted:

I don't get it. Did someVal or x get affected by someFunction call?

It's even simpler than that.

Look at the semicolons

# ? Feb 23, 2010 06:37

DoctorTristan: Mar 11, 2006; I would look up into your lifeless eyes and wave, like this. Can you and your associates arrange that for me, Mr. Morden?

Infinite Recursion posted:

It's even simpler than that.

Look at the semicolons

Well that's what you get for using Allman style :colbert:

# ? Feb 23, 2010 11:15

Standish: May 21, 2001

DoctorTristan posted:

Well that's what you get for using Allman style

what you get for not using -Wextra you mean.

edit: actually -Wextra will only warn for empty if/else/do-while loops, never mind me.

# ? Feb 23, 2010 11:36

Blotto Skorzany: Nov 7, 2008; He's a PSoC, loose and runnin'
came the whisper from each lip
And he's here to do some business with
the bad ADC on his chip
bad ADC on his chiiiiip

Standish posted:

what you get for not using -Wextra you mean.

edit: actually -Wextra will only warn for empty if/else/do-while loops, never mind me.

http://peter.hates-software.com/2004/08/20/6550cefa.html

GCC's option flags are a horror, although of lesser magnitude than GCC's internals and much of glibc

# ? Feb 23, 2010 11:50

trex eaterofcadrs: Jun 17, 2005; My lack of understanding is only exceeded by my lack of concern.

Otto Skorzeny posted:

http://peter.hates-software.com/2004/08/20/6550cefa.html

GCC's option flags are a horror, although of lesser magnitude than GCC's internals and much of glibc

hey it's the elvis operator!

# ? Feb 23, 2010 15:10

RussianManiac: Dec 27, 2005; by Ozmaugh

Infinite Recursion posted:

It's even simpler than that.

Look at the semicolons

Ohh, didn't notice that. That would be frustrating to fix assuming I had a habit of ending while loops with ;

# ? Feb 23, 2010 15:49

Troglepus: Jan 10, 2007; A man for all and none.

Code posted:

/// <summary>
/// Gets the HashCode for the object
/// </summary>
/// <returns>Returns an integer HashCode</returns>
public override int GetHashCode()
{
string TypeAndID = string.Format("{0}~+~+~{1}", this.GetType().FullName, this.ID);
return TypeAndID.GetHashCode();
}

/// <summary>
/// Tests validity of passed object
/// </summary>
/// <param name="obj"></param>
/// <returns>Returns boolean: false of passed object is null, otherwise result of testing object's HashCode</returns>
public override bool Equals(object obj)
{
IBaseObject bobj = obj as IBaseObject;

if (bobj == null) { return false; }

return this.GetHashCode() == bobj.GetHashCode();
}

# ? Feb 23, 2010 21:57

Infinite Recursion: Mar 26, 2008; Try this trick and spin it, yeah
Your head will collapse
But there's nothing in it

DoctorTristan posted:

Well that's what you get for using Allman style

I like my clearly-defined starting and ending points for blocks of code :colbert:

# ? Feb 23, 2010 22:16

ColdPie: Jun 9, 2006

Infinite Recursion posted:

I like my clearly-defined starting and ending points for blocks of code

Ever heard of indentation?

# ? Feb 23, 2010 23:04

Blotto Skorzany: Nov 7, 2008; He's a PSoC, loose and runnin'
came the whisper from each lip
And he's here to do some business with
the bad ADC on his chip
bad ADC on his chiiiiip

Infinite Recursion posted:

I like my clearly-defined starting and ending points for blocks of code

code:

if (foo) {
     bar();
     while (baz) {
          fred();
     }
}

Clearly defined enough for me, clearly defined enough for vim that I can bounce on the % key when it's three in the afternoon, dunno what your major malfunction is

# ? Feb 23, 2010 23:10

Infinite Recursion: Mar 26, 2008; Try this trick and spin it, yeah
Your head will collapse
But there's nothing in it

Eh, I don't really mind either method; indentation is more than enough for me, I was just taught to use the Allman style, and haven't bothered to change that habit. I've even considered going to Python style*, so that the only (efficient) way to distinguish blocks of code is through indentation.

*i.e.:

code:

for (i = 0; i < 10; i++) {
     if(i % 2 == 0) {
         doSomething(i); }
     else {
         doSomethingElse(i); } }

Infinite Recursion fucked around with this message at 23:55 on Feb 23, 2010

# ? Feb 23, 2010 23:53

ColdPie: Jun 9, 2006

Infinite Recursion posted:

Eh, I don't really mind either method; indentation is more than enough for me, I was just taught to use the Allman style, and haven't bothered to change that habit. I've even considered going to Python style*, so that the only (efficient) way to distinguish blocks of code is through indentation.

*i.e.:
code:
for (i = 0; i < 10; i++) {
     if(i % 2 == 0) {
         doSomething(i); }
     else {
         doSomethingElse(i); } }

If I ever saw someone using this in practice, I'd probably post it in this thread.

# ? Feb 24, 2010 00:20

Sebbe: Feb 29, 2004

ColdPie posted:

If I ever saw someone using this in practice, I'd probably post it in this thread.

I have seen students do this in practice (albeit without proper indentation).

Either you do grouping by indentation or you do grouping by braces; both look fine, but by god, taking grouping by indentation and appending braces to make it balance out makes it look like an afterthought.

# ? Feb 24, 2010 00:30

Infinite Recursion: Mar 26, 2008; Try this trick and spin it, yeah
Your head will collapse
But there's nothing in it

ColdPie posted:

If I ever saw someone using this in practice, I'd probably post it in this thread.

I'll never actually use it, of course, but it had been a consideration when I started learning Python (this was before I realised that using one language's standards for another is a terrible idea).

# ? Feb 24, 2010 00:31

fankey: Aug 31, 2001

ColdPie posted:

If I ever saw someone using this in practice, I'd probably post it in this thread.

One of my first tasks as an intern many years ago was dealing with a 5k+ line source file that some 'smart guy' programmed exactly in this way. It's really fun when you just want to comment out doSomething in the example above. This was before there were any tools ( at least that I was aware of ) for automatically reformatting code. The indention craziness was just one of the horrors involved in that file.

# ? Feb 24, 2010 01:25

Blotto Skorzany: Nov 7, 2008; He's a PSoC, loose and runnin'
came the whisper from each lip
And he's here to do some business with
the bad ADC on his chip
bad ADC on his chiiiiip

fankey posted:

One of my first tasks as an intern many years ago was dealing with a 5k+ line source file that some 'smart guy' programmed exactly in this way. It's really fun when you just want to comment out doSomething in the example above. This was before there were any tools ( at least that I was aware of ) for automatically reformatting code. The indention craziness was just one of the horrors involved in that file.

Why oh why do the children not learn to unix in school :negative:

indent(1) for the uninitiated

# ? Feb 24, 2010 01:43

Dijkstracula: Mar 18, 2003; You can't spell 'vector field' without me, Professor!

Otto Skorzeny posted:

Why oh why do the children not learn to unix in school

indent(1) for the uninitiated

ntaylor@li85-191:~$ man indent No manual entry for indent

:negative:

edit: o it's in osx though :shobon:

Dijkstracula fucked around with this message at 06:21 on Feb 24, 2010

# ? Feb 24, 2010 06:09

Sewer Adventure: Aug 25, 2004

Dijkstracula posted:

ntaylor@li85-191:~$ man indent No manual entry for indent

edit: o it's in osx though

code:

~% sudo port install indent
--->  Computing dependencies for indent
--->  Fetching indent
--->  Attempting to fetch indent-2.2.10.tar.gz from [url]http://www.mirrorservice.org/sites/ftp.gnu.org/gnu/indent[/url]
--->  Verifying checksum(s) for indent
--->  Extracting indent
--->  Applying patches to indent
--->  Configuring indent
--->  Building indent
--->  Staging indent into destroot
--->  Installing indent @2.2.10_0
--->  Activating indent @2.2.10_0
--->  Cleaning indent
~%

# ? Feb 24, 2010 08:31

Munkeymon: Aug 14, 2003; Motherfucker's got an
armor-piercing crowbar! Rigoddamndicu𝜆ous.

Dijkstracula posted:

edit: o it's in osx though

Not on our OSX machines here at work

# ? Feb 24, 2010 16:11

Pardot: Jul 25, 2001

Sewer Adventure posted:

code:

~% sudo port install indent
--->  Computing dependencies for indent
--->  Fetching indent
--->  Attempting to fetch indent-2.2.10.tar.gz from [url]http://www.mirrorservice.org/sites/ftp.gnu.org/gnu/indent[/url]
--->  Verifying checksum(s) for indent
--->  Extracting indent
--->  Applying patches to indent
--->  Configuring indent
--->  Building indent
--->  Staging indent into destroot
--->  Installing indent @2.2.10_0
--->  Activating indent @2.2.10_0
--->  Cleaning indent
~%

Everyone is using brew now instead of port :ssh:

# ? Feb 24, 2010 16:31

fankey: Aug 31, 2001

Otto Skorzeny posted:

Why oh why do the children not learn to unix in school

indent(1) for the uninitiated

Children? This was on Windows 3.11 ( for workgroups! ). Unfortunately my machine wasn't one that was blessed with a modem to reach the outside world - perhaps I could have posted to alt.reformat.my.code.please if it was.

# ? Feb 24, 2010 17:38

Sewer Adventure: Aug 25, 2004

Pardot posted:

Everyone is using brew now instead of port

# ? Feb 24, 2010 19:27

FateFree: Nov 14, 2003

I had to post this. I've seen a lot of lovely code in my day, but this is hands down the worst method I've ever seen written in my life. This simple method shows such a misunderstanding of the basic principles of coding with Java and coding in general.

The method in question is in a utility to format Strings or something.

code:

public static String convertLongObjectToString(Object value) {
    return String.valueOf((Long)value);
}

Yes brilliant. Lets see how this is being called.

code:

public void setDataValue(Object value) {
   this.setId(DataFormatHelper.convertLongObjectToString((Object)value)
}

I don't even know where to begin. Its almost so ridiculous that I feel like maybe I'm missing something. Not many methods have the ability to make you somehow feel dumber by association.

# ? Feb 25, 2010 17:29

RussianManiac: Dec 27, 2005; by Ozmaugh

What's wrong with that, brah, haven't you ever herd of polymorphism?

# ? Feb 25, 2010 17:35

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Apr 28, 2024 17:19

markerstore: Dec 5, 2003; Canny!

RussianManiac posted:

What's wrong with that, brah, haven't you ever herd of polymorphism?

it's static "brah"

# ? Feb 25, 2010 21:42

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Serious Hardware/Software Crap > The Cavern of COBOL > Coding Horrors: You can gather all your technical debt into one easy framework!

«‹›1501 »