|
adamsappel wrote: PS: I'm not an "Rsole"
What, exactly, is an Rsole??
|
|
|
|
|
Say the first letter on it's own.
|
|
|
|
|
Jeez, is that the letter 'a'?
"The clue train passed his station without stopping." - John Simmons / outlaw programmer
"Real programmers just throw a bunch of 1s and 0s at the computer to see what sticks" - Pete O'Hanlon
"Not only do you continue to babble nonsense, you can't even correctly remember the nonsense you babbled just minutes ago." - Rob Graham
|
|
|
|
|
Pete O'Hanlon wrote: Say the first letter on it's own.
oK
|
|
|
|
|
adamsappel wrote: it's worth mentioning what the sex of the person is
Why? It doesn't have any bearing on the code.
adamsappel wrote: If it was worth mentioning that the profession of the "developer" in question is
That has a bearing on the code. The sex of the person doesn't.
adamsappel wrote: Feminist pricks.
You're just being a bigotted sexist pig, and people are rightly offended by such an obnoxious attitude.
|
|
|
|
|
I agree. The quality of the code written does not have any real relation to the gender of the individual. It is more of the individual and the background, training, mentoring that they have received when learning to code.
"The clue train passed his station without stopping." - John Simmons / outlaw programmer
"Real programmers just throw a bunch of 1s and 0s at the computer to see what sticks" - Pete O'Hanlon
"Not only do you continue to babble nonsense, you can't even correctly remember the nonsense you babbled just minutes ago." - Rob Graham
|
|
|
|
|
It's called: "being ironic", feminist pricks? blah...
In my limited years of coding, I have found that female code, must not be maintained. It will work and most of the time you can build over it, but (and yes, she does have a very nice one), working with a man, who wrote such code, I would seriously (and surely you agree) kick him in the nads, even if he were a priest by proffesion.
A woman on the other hand would cut of my f*%$ing head without so much as a backward glance if I even peep about her code being (unreadable) and men and woman are just different. That's a fact. Programming is basically a text representation of a train of thought of an individual within a certain set of rules. And men and woman just don't think the same, don't have the same goals, don't have the same set of rules, don't have the same taste in beverage, don't have the same anatomy (although, I do have a nice pair of tits, that may come in handy), and so on and so forth.
You can kindof see the direction I'm pointing myself in here, going for the "ignorance" plea.
Feminists? Man, I hate feminists. I hate racists. I hate all types of "-ists", especially those that grow on my ass(cysts, you get it?). Taking it too far. If the situation were turned around, you won't see people berating me about being a, what, hipocrit?
|
|
|
|
|
I'm sorry you've had such bad experiences, but mine have been the opposite.
Today's lesson is brought to you by the word "niggardly". Remember kids, don't attribute to racism what can be explained by Scandinavian language roots.
-- Robert Royall
|
|
|
|
|
Female <- not biased, just stating the fact
One of my (female) colleague accepts the fact that females aren't technically that sound. (I just mentioned her thought, not mine ! )
- Malli...!
|
|
|
|
|
Not saying females aren't technically sound, just saying their track record isn't exactly up to scratch, which is kind of contradicting myself, so ignore my first statement...
|
|
|
|
|
Because it is a proof of the long held belief that (generally) women can not program. There are exceptions of course, but overall male programmers out number female programmers at least 2,3 to 1.
|
|
|
|
|
Not sure about the sql query your colleague wrote. That had to be a joke on a dull Friday afternoon
"The clue train passed his station without stopping." - John Simmons / outlaw programmer
"Real programmers just throw a bunch of 1s and 0s at the computer to see what sticks" - Pete O'Hanlon
"Not only do you continue to babble nonsense, you can't even correctly remember the nonsense you babbled just minutes ago." - Rob Graham
|
|
|
|
|
else if ( ((isEXEDLL == true) || (isEXEConfig == true))
&& ((staysTheSameEXEDLL == false) || (EXEDLLPathExistsSoCanProcess == true))
)
{
if ( ((isEXEDLL == true) || (isEXEConfig == true))
&& (staysTheSameEXEDLL == false)
)
{
if (canCopy.DoCopy == true)
{
I'm faint !
- Malli...!
|
|
|
|
|
I have a couple of apps that I maintain (originally written by, yes, a female, human as well, and an entry-level developer) who constantly checked for (boolean_value = true).
|
|
|
|
|
(boolean_value = true) || (boolean_value == true)
|
|
|
|
|
VentsyV wrote: (boolean_value = true) || (boolean_value == true)
LMAO...Reading this, I was suddenly taken back to Irving M. Copi's _Introduction_to_Logic_, which I used as a textbook for an independent study in high school...it's the definition of a tautology...making it "too true"
|
|
|
|
|
You have good chances for a lot of small talk.
Greetings from Germany
|
|
|
|
|
I just found this in the project that I inherited ... it is working code. You don't have to be expert in ColdFusion to see that's something wrong with this
<cfloop index="i" from="1" to="1">
<cfloop list="#structKeyList(xnA)#" index="x">
<cfset y='xnA['&i&'].'&#x#&'.XMLtext'>
<cfset temp = QuerySetCell(clientQuery,"#x#",#evaluate(y)#, #i#)>
</cfloop>
</cfloop>
|
|
|
|
|
That's nothing wrong, it's simply a respectable horror.
If the Lord God Almighty had consulted me before embarking upon the Creation, I would have recommended something simpler.
-- Alfonso the Wise, 13th Century King of Castile.
This is going on my arrogant assumptions. You may have a superb reason why I'm completely wrong.
-- Iain Clarke
[My articles]
|
|
|
|
|
looks like code that at one time did something, but then got changed but never cleaned up
Einstein argued that there must be simplified explanations of nature, because God is not capricious or arbitrary. No such faith comforts the software engineer.
-Fred Brooks
|
|
|
|
|
ditto, and maybe it was intentionally left that way because it may change yet again
|
|
|
|
|
StevenWalsh wrote: Einstein argued that there must be simplified explanations of nature, because God is not capricious or arbitrary. No such faith comforts the software engineer.
-Fred Brooks
That's actually not matter of faith: while nature obeys God's plans, the software engineer deals with project manager's ones.
If the Lord God Almighty had consulted me before embarking upon the Creation, I would have recommended something simpler.
-- Alfonso the Wise, 13th Century King of Castile.
This is going on my arrogant assumptions. You may have a superb reason why I'm completely wrong.
-- Iain Clarke
[My articles]
|
|
|
|
|
I've done that; I've shrunk the range of a for loop for testing and then forgot to put it back.
Anyone who thinks he has a better idea of what's good for people than people do is a swine.
- P.J. O'Rourke
|
|
|
|
|
Yuck.
"The clue train passed his station without stopping." - John Simmons / outlaw programmer
"Real programmers just throw a bunch of 1s and 0s at the computer to see what sticks" - Pete O'Hanlon
"Not only do you continue to babble nonsense, you can't even correctly remember the nonsense you babbled just minutes ago." - Rob Graham
|
|
|
|
|
First, let me say that the code excerpt below is not an egregious violation (and maybe not a violation at all), but it is a coding horror for my programming style and I am curious as to what the others here think about it.
So, in reviewing a coworker's code I come across the following line:
m_boolVar = (intVar == 0 ? false : true) ;
Yes, parenthesization and spacing exactly as shown above. Were it my code, it would have been written as:
m_boolVar = intVar != 0;
...or if I was feeling in a bit more perverse mood:
m_boolVar = !!intVar;
There were much bigger fish to fry in this code, but there are times when I just can't let things like this go by. These things are like misspelled words that shout out at me from among the surrounding text.
modified on Tuesday, September 16, 2008 3:02 AM
|
|
|
|