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!

«‹›1503 »

Space Kablooey: May 6, 2009

My condolences on your liver. :yotj:

# ? Feb 26, 2014 16:44

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 17, 2024 01:37

Sulla Faex: May 14, 2010; No man ever did me so much good, or enemy so much harm, but I repaid him with ENDLESS SHITPOSTING

HardDisk posted:

My condolences on your liver.

I work in Italy so the peroni is about 1.20 euro for 660mL from the place downstairs.

Speaking of which, a co-worker just asked me if I "astral project" while I sleep. Apparently he does, and it's fun. His English is worse than my Italian so I say "oh, you mean lucid dreaming. Quando si accorge che e' un sogno mentre dorme."

"Yes. When the soul leaves the body."

And now he's listening to chinese meditation music. So I guess he did mean astral projection after all.

What was that about my liver??

# ? Feb 26, 2014 17:11

QuarkJets: Sep 8, 2008

Sulla-Marius 88 posted:

I really should but for a month or two now the client has made us move development onto the testing server (while still asking for new features they forgot to think of before, and serious re-writes of old features), which is behind a vpn that can only be access externally through citrix. So every time I wanted to modify a file I'd have to find the file on my local machine and copy paste the code from citrix, modify, save, then copy paste back out through citrix, and I just know I'd gently caress up and forget to do it after a little bit.

I basically just went "gently caress it, I'll turn up, do the best I can, go home and not think about it" a while back when I realised the true extent of how poo poo the situation is. The clients are all manner of hosed as well and I'm hoping that if I just keep turning up and doing stuff, one day it will be done and I won't have to see this project ever again.

I don't know what citrix is, but wouldn't git even make that process easier? You could push/pull across the VPN and not mess with copy-pasting of individual lines, or if that wasn't feasible for some reason then you could at least easily figure out which files have changed and in what way.

Basically I'm saying to set up a private repo and a repo for the project but not tell anyone; it'll be transparent to the people who aren't using it.

# ? Feb 26, 2014 20:02

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

QuarkJets posted:

I don't know what citrix is

Lucky bastard. Have you used Parallels to run a Windows program on a Mac or tunneled an X session over ssh? It's like that but on a different machine you don't control and it's Enterprise Grade Software so you can be assured it's terrible (or was back when I had to use it).

# ? Feb 26, 2014 21:01

Sulla Faex: May 14, 2010; No man ever did me so much good, or enemy so much harm, but I repaid him with ENDLESS SHITPOSTING

QuarkJets posted:

I don't know what citrix is, but wouldn't git even make that process easier? You could push/pull across the VPN and not mess with copy-pasting of individual lines, or if that wasn't feasible for some reason then you could at least easily figure out which files have changed and in what way.

Basically I'm saying to set up a private repo and a repo for the project but not tell anyone; it'll be transparent to the people who aren't using it.

citrix is like a web browser rdp that god designed to punish the wicked, which inevitably means it staff and programmers, but the server is behind a locked firewall so you cant do poo poo except citrix. Cant even ftp or rdp out if youre on the network itself with an account created specifically for devs

E: actually i was there a few weeks ago and to propagate changes to the dev server i would have to zip files and email them to the guy next to me who would extract, overwrite, and test, because he had brought his WiFi dongle. Really made me rethink how bad unemployment could really be..

Sulla Faex fucked around with this message at 21:20 on Feb 26, 2014

# ? Feb 26, 2014 21:17

dorkanoid: Dec 21, 2004

HardDisk posted:

If you want to get fancy, BitBucket's private repos are free for 5 users.

I'm not sure I would send "company code" to a third party without any kind of permission or general blessing :raise:

# ? Feb 27, 2014 00:28

JawnV6: Jul 4, 2004; So hot ...

Just when you thought you were ISO compliant...

# ? Feb 27, 2014 00:43

HORATIO HORNBLOWER: Sep 21, 2002; no ambition,
no talent,
no chance

Sulla-Marius 88 posted:

I really should but for a month or two now the client has made us move development onto the testing server (while still asking for new features they forgot to think of before, and serious re-writes of old features), which is behind a vpn that can only be access externally through citrix. So every time I wanted to modify a file I'd have to find the file on my local machine and copy paste the code from citrix, modify, save, then copy paste back out through citrix, and I just know I'd gently caress up and forget to do it after a little bit.

I basically just went "gently caress it, I'll turn up, do the best I can, go home and not think about it" a while back when I realised the true extent of how poo poo the situation is. The clients are all manner of hosed as well and I'm hoping that if I just keep turning up and doing stuff, one day it will be done and I won't have to see this project ever again.

Man and I thought our "process" stank. Thanks for the perspective.

# ? Feb 27, 2014 03:34

fritz: Jul 26, 2003

dorkanoid posted:

I'm not sure I would send "company code" to a third party without any kind of permission or general blessing

Yeah, that seems like it's just asking for trouble.

# ? Feb 27, 2014 03:38

Space Kablooey: May 6, 2009

dorkanoid posted:

I'm not sure I would send "company code" to a third party without any kind of permission or general blessing

Fair enough. He can still set up a local repo for himself, and not waste hours on reverting things.

By the way, Sulla, how does your company handle (or doesn't) multiple developers on the same project?

# ? Feb 27, 2014 04:46

Sulla Faex: May 14, 2010; No man ever did me so much good, or enemy so much harm, but I repaid him with ENDLESS SHITPOSTING

HardDisk posted:

Fair enough. He can still set up a local repo for himself, and not waste hours on reverting things.

Oh I should clarify, I didn't have to revert it, because he was adding some styling and some extra little feature that we needed (literally a checkbox that shows whether something has been completed or not) so I had to go through and fix what he broke while adding it. But he is just such a hack-and-slash, copy-and-paste-and-hit-until-it-works kind of guy that he just totally mangled everything. For example, copy and paste poo poo like

code:

<div id='summarydiv' style='width:50%'>

into a foreach loop. He doesn't know what he's doing with anything else, and just modifies stuff and adds stuff and comments out and moves it around and refreshes the page each time until he hits bingo, the css designer's "i'm showing some boxes or some words and numbers that seem similar to what you're expecting, let's head home and call it job well done". So he broke a bunch of my stuff and it looked like it was my fault. It turns out they were trying to access it in a manner contrary to how they're supposed to so it never would have worked anyway, but through coincidence the thing had been broken anyway. Ha he heh ha heheh hhhhhhehhhh.

HardDisk posted:

By the way, Sulla, how does your company handle (or doesn't) multiple developers on the same project?

Each guy works on a different thing and when there is a conflict you work together or just say "hey don't work on this for a bit". And if someone has to do something with my code, I hope for the best and come back in a week and fix whatever they broke. If I have to work on someone else's code I just fix what will actually directly cause fatal errors and duplicate DB entries and whatever, and just try really hard not to notice the rest, and let them sort it out later, otherwise it'll look like I'm super incompetent and taking ages to add/modify a simple feature on a functionality that's already "working".

# ? Feb 27, 2014 10:08

Fuck them: Jan 21, 2011; and their bullshit

So someone just repeatedly implemented entire methods which amount to "serialize this business object" instead of making a generic function. We have XML Columns peppered throughout various tables in the database we use. Why would you make multiple functions which do the exact same thing, just make a XML object based on the properties in the model you pass into it, instead of a generic of some sort?

I just obviated dozens of methods that were identical by making a base class and popping in a generic function.

# ? Feb 27, 2014 20:01

JawnV6: Jul 4, 2004; So hot ...

Next week you'll be writing a simple dedicated function instead of some generic monstrosity that's handling a range of inputs that will never, ever, ever, be generated in the real world.

# ? Feb 27, 2014 20:05

Rocko Bonaparte: Mar 12, 2002; Every day is Friday!

There is a post on the intranet here from a guy complaining about the IT department and laptop fixes. Apparently he lost his curly bracket keys and IT just gives him another broken laptop shell when he complains. He just gave up and writes all his Perl without using associative arrays, procedures, conditionals, and loops.

# ? Feb 27, 2014 20:10

Fuck them: Jan 21, 2011; and their bullshit

JawnV6 posted:

Next week you'll be writing a simple dedicated function instead of some generic monstrosity that's handling a range of inputs that will never, ever, ever, be generated in the real world.

code:

Function XMLSerializer(Of T)(ByVal Model As T) As String

        Dim xmlSer As XmlSerializer
        Dim xmlDoc As XDocument
        Dim xmlWri As XmlWriter
        Dim xEl As XElement

        xmlSer = New XmlSerializer(Model.GetType)
        xmlDoc = New XDocument
        xmlWri = xmlDoc.CreateWriter

        xmlSer.Serialize(xmlWri, Model)

        xmlWri.Close()

        xEl = xmlDoc.Root

        Return xEl.ToString()

    End Function

Literally a monster.

# ? Feb 27, 2014 20:27

Marta Velasquez: Mar 9, 2013; Good thing I was feeling suicidal this morning...; Fallen Rib

Rocko Bonaparte posted:

He just gave up and writes all his Perl without using associative arrays, procedures, conditionals, and loops.

There's a module to make perl understand trigraphs.

code:

  use Filter::Trigraph;

  my $x = shift??!??!"testing";
  if($ENV??<BIGVOWELS??>)??<
    ??= uppercase all vowels in $x
    $x=??-s/(??(aeiou??))/??/u$1/g;
  ??>else??<
    ??= uppercase all non-vowels in $x
    $x=??-s/(??(??'aeiou??))/??/u$1/g;
  ??>
  $??!=1;
  print "$x??/n";

I'm sure he'll love that.

# ? Feb 27, 2014 20:28

JawnV6: Jul 4, 2004; So hot ...

2banks1swap.avi posted:

Literally a monster.

I wasn't referring to this exact function. I'm saying that you've identified an engineering tradeoff. This week you've seen one extreme in one code base. Next week you might see the other extreme in a different code base. I'm sure you'll talk about it in the same smug as poo poo tone.

# ? Feb 27, 2014 20:30

Fuck them: Jan 21, 2011; and their bullshit

JawnV6 posted:

I wasn't referring to this exact function. I'm saying that you've identified an engineering tradeoff. This week you've seen one extreme in one code base. Next week you might see the other extreme in a different code base. I'm sure you'll talk about it in the same smug as poo poo tone.

code:

    Private Function SerializeType(foo As Type) As String



        Dim xmlSer As XmlSerializer

        Dim xmlDoc As XDocument

        Dim xmlWri As XmlWriter



        xmlSer = New XmlSerializer(foo .GetType)

        xmlDoc = New XDocument

        xmlWri = xmlDoc.CreateWriter



        xmlSer.Serialize(xmlWri, foo )



        xmlWri.Close()



        Dim xEl As XElement

        xEl = xmlDoc.Root



        Return xEl.ToString()



    End Function

How is repeating this over and over for dozens of types even remotely a good idea or a trade off of anything?

# ? Feb 27, 2014 20:36

New Yorp New Yorp: Jul 18, 2003; Only in Kenya.; Pillbug

2banks1swap.avi posted:

code:

Function XMLSerializer(Of T)(ByVal Model As T) As String

        Dim xmlSer As XmlSerializer
        Dim xmlDoc As XDocument
        Dim xmlWri As XmlWriter
        Dim xEl As XElement

        xmlSer = New XmlSerializer(Model.GetType)
        xmlDoc = New XDocument
        xmlWri = xmlDoc.CreateWriter

        xmlSer.Serialize(xmlWri, Model)

        xmlWri.Close()

        xEl = xmlDoc.Root

        Return xEl.ToString()

    End Function

Literally a monster.

You should have that XMLWriter in a using block. :smug:

# ? Feb 27, 2014 20:40

Plorkyeran: Mar 22, 2007; To Escape The Shackles Of The Old Forums, We Must Reject The Tribal Negativity He Endorsed

2banks1swap.avi posted:

How is repeating this over and over for dozens of types even remotely a good idea or a trade off of anything?

What if you want to make one of the types work subtly different in confusing ways?

# ? Feb 27, 2014 20:42

Fuck them: Jan 21, 2011; and their bullshit

Plorkyeran posted:

What if you want to make one of the types work subtly different in confusing ways?

That's different but not the case here. It's just individual xml objects for xml columns in a db.

Edit: It's literally just a bag of properties kind of class. Nothing too funny going on here. If I'm really coming across like a cock I need to change my tone but it was seriously just "WTF" to me reading over the dev's code.

Ithaqua posted:

You should have that XMLWriter in a using block.

Fuck them fucked around with this message at 20:55 on Feb 27, 2014

# ? Feb 27, 2014 20:44

QuarkJets: Sep 8, 2008

Munkeymon posted:

Lucky bastard. Have you used Parallels to run a Windows program on a Mac or tunneled an X session over ssh? It's like that but on a different machine you don't control and it's Enterprise Grade Software so you can be assured it's terrible (or was back when I had to use it).

That sounds terrible, why do people use it? Is this basically just the all-too-common case of managers buying some poo poo and loving everyone in the process?

# ? Feb 27, 2014 22:40

Dren: Jan 5, 2001; Pillbug

Please put enums in namespaces. Especially if they include a really common name like "ERROR".

# ? Feb 27, 2014 22:42

shrughes: Oct 11, 2008; (call/cc call/cc)

Dren posted:

Please put enums in namespaces. Especially if they include a really common name like "ERROR".

In what language?

# ? Feb 28, 2014 08:42

ninjeff: Jan 19, 2004

2banks1swap.avi posted:

code:

Function XMLSerializer(Of T)(ByVal Model As T) As String

        Dim xmlSer As XmlSerializer
        Dim xmlDoc As XDocument
        Dim xmlWri As XmlWriter
        Dim xEl As XElement

        xmlSer = New XmlSerializer(Model.GetType)
        xmlDoc = New XDocument
        xmlWri = xmlDoc.CreateWriter

        xmlSer.Serialize(xmlWri, Model)

        xmlWri.Close()

        xEl = xmlDoc.Root

        Return xEl.ToString()

    End Function

Literally a monster.

Why did you make a type parameter for this method? You didn't use it anywhere.

# ? Feb 28, 2014 10:18

qntm: Jun 17, 2009

JavaScript code:

var selectHeader = this._defaultLayout[0];
selectHeader.name = "newName";
this._defaultLayout.splice(0, 1, selectHeader);

# ? Feb 28, 2014 12:23

Dren: Jan 5, 2001; Pillbug

shrughes posted:

In what language?

C++

# ? Feb 28, 2014 14:51

shrughes: Oct 11, 2008; (call/cc call/cc)

Dren posted:

C++

Just use scoped enums.

# ? Feb 28, 2014 14:53

Dren: Jan 5, 2001; Pillbug

shrughes posted:

Just use scoped enums.

That's great, didn't know about those. Just have to see if anyone disagrees with turning on -std=c++0x on this old version of gcc to get support for scoped enums.

# ? Feb 28, 2014 16:10

qntm: Jun 17, 2009

JavaScript code:

var items = "{\"items\": [";
var insertComma = false;
this.cells.forEach(function(object) {
  if(!object.hidden) {
    switch(object.field) {
      case "messageKey":
        break;
      default:
        if(insertComma) {
          items = items + ",";
        }
        items = items + "{\"name\": \"" + object.name + "\",\"value\": \"" + object.field + "\"}";
        insertComma = true;
    }
  }
});
items = items + "]}";
var comboItems = eval("(" + items + ")");

# ? Feb 28, 2014 16:26

Lumpy: Apr 26, 2002; La! La! La! Laaaa!; College Slice

qntm posted:

JavaScript code:

var items = "{\"items\": [";
var insertComma = false;
this.cells.forEach(function(object) {
  if(!object.hidden) {
    switch(object.field) {
      case "messageKey":
        break;
      default:
        if(insertComma) {
          items = items + ",";
        }
        items = items + "{\"name\": \"" + object.name + "\",\"value\": \"" + object.field + "\"}";
        insertComma = true;
    }
  }
});
items = items + "]}";
var comboItems = eval("(" + items + ")");

"Ok, he could use join to refactor that insertComma bit, but it's not too bad, let me just read this last line here and...." :stonk:

# ? Feb 28, 2014 16:29

..btt: Mar 26, 2008

What are you talking about? Even before the eval he is using string concatenation to build a JSON object. In JavaScript.

# ? Feb 28, 2014 16:43

Westie: May 30, 2013; Baboon Simulator

qntm posted:

Reminds me of something I encountered on one of my projects at work - or rather, on a client's former site.

This calculation was used for calculating dues:

JavaScript code:

var total = eval(var1) + eval(var2) + eval(val3) - eval(val4);

I can't remember the exact values, but all eval(varX) were numbers, from a form input.

And yes, inputting one value as window.alert("hello.jpg") did produce a modal, and tell the folks that they need to pay �NaN!

# ? Feb 28, 2014 18:14

Strong Sauce: Jul 2, 2003; You know I am not really your father.

I refuse to pay Lnan. That guy is kind of a jerk :colbert:

# ? Feb 28, 2014 18:30

qntm: Jun 17, 2009

..btt posted:

What are you talking about? Even before the eval he is using string concatenation to build a JSON object. In JavaScript.

But that final line is the best part. All along, you assume that this is a misguided attempt to build a JSON string for an XHR or something. And then it turns out that no, this programmer just forgot about object literals.

# ? Feb 28, 2014 20:25

Lumpy: Apr 26, 2002; La! La! La! Laaaa!; College Slice

qntm posted:

But that final line is the best part. All along, you assume that this is a misguided attempt to build a JSON string for an XHR or something. And then it turns out that no, this programmer just forgot about object literals.

Yeah, exactly. I thought this was "old" return a JSON string before JSON.stringify was a thing code. Then the shocking truth was revealed!

# ? Feb 28, 2014 21:02

Flobbster: Feb 17, 2005; "Cadet Kirk, after the way you cheated on the Kobayashi Maru test I oughta punch you in tha face!"

I haven't done anything serious with C++ for about 6 years or so, and I'm just getting back into it to work on a cocos2d game in my spare time. While I'd kept up reading about all the changes in C++11, I'm only now getting to use the new features in "real" code.

Initializer lists are amazing to set up complex structures with very little code. I've got a method where I return a vector of vectors of strings (appropriately typedef'd, I swear it's legit) and all I had to do was:

code:

return {{x}};

Am I the horror? :ohdear:

# ? Mar 2, 2014 04:58

Factor Mystic: Mar 20, 2006; Baby's First Post-Apocalyptic Fiction

qntm posted:

But that final line is the best part. All along, you assume that this is a misguided attempt to build a JSON string for an XHR or something. And then it turns out that no, this programmer just forgot about object literals.

I'm guessing its a misguided attempt at object cloning.

# ? Mar 2, 2014 06:18

zeekner: Jul 14, 2007

So CSON is a thing, a coffescript variant of JSON.

Of course, it turns out the parser is really just an eval(), because why would you expect anything better. https://github.com/bevry/cson/issues/32

The worst part is this project is over two years old.

# ? Mar 2, 2014 07:17

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 17, 2024 01:37

ohgodwhat: Aug 6, 2005

Munkeymon posted:

Lucky bastard. Have you used Parallels to run a Windows program on a Mac or tunneled an X session over ssh? It's like that but on a different machine you don't control and it's Enterprise Grade Software so you can be assured it's terrible (or was back when I had to use it).

Ah, but what about X tunneling over SSH to Windows, where you then have to copy and paste text into gedit if you wanted to transfer something to the server? Oh and then you need to transfer binary files this way because SCP and its ilk are a security risk?

# ? Mar 2, 2014 07:48

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!

«‹›1503 »