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 »

Gazpacho: Jun 18, 2004; by Fluffdaddy; Slippery Tilde

PhantomOfTheCopier posted:

In the end, they ~~realize~~ assume that `rm -rf` and `git clone repo dirname` are common in git workflows, and they end up with multiple local directories for their local work. Indistinguishable from CVS.

Cloning as part of a "workflow" (I hate that term) is the numero uno sign that someone has missed the point of git branches.

It's you. You are the problem.

# ? Sep 4, 2017 19:49

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 23, 2024 13:24

vOv: Feb 8, 2014

pokeyman posted:

It's also the only kind of breaking change covered by the term "semantic versioning"?

If I add a side effect of 'rm -rf *' to a function, that's a breaking change but it's not going to cause a compiler error.

# ? Sep 4, 2017 20:24

pokeyman: Nov 26, 2006; That elephant ate my entire platoon.

I agree with y'all in general but I was specifically thinking of semver.org which says

quote:

Given a version number MAJOR.MINOR.PATCH, increment the:

MAJOR version when you make incompatible API changes,
MINOR version when you add functionality in a backwards-compatible manner, and
PATCH version when you make backwards-compatible bug fixes.
Additional labels for pre-release and build metadata are available as extensions to the MAJOR.MINOR.PATCH format.

...

For this system to work, you first need to declare a public API. This may consist of documentation or be enforced by the code itself.

If the library is hilariously poorly documented then maybe all you have to go off as API is the types and functions. If there's something else documented then yeah there's a better defined API that can't as easily be broken in fun and interesting ways.

vOv posted:

If I add a side effect of 'rm -rf *' to a function, that's a breaking change but it's not going to cause a compiler error.

I can see an rear end in a top hat library maintainer arguing otherwise because they didn't document the API, you just have some function and its return type and parameters, so it's not a breaking change. Probably an unreasonable argument unless the function is called deleteLotsOfThings but this is the kind of dumb stuff I had in mind and have been bitten by in (admittedly not great) libraries. Can't generally rely on semver.

# ? Sep 4, 2017 20:54

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

Semver.org makes no attempt at defining what an "incompatible API change" is. It certainly doesn't claim that only things statically detectable count.

# ? Sep 4, 2017 21:16

Coffee Mugshot: Jun 26, 2010; by Lowtax

Gazpacho posted:

Cloning as part of a "workflow" (I hate that term) is the numero uno sign that someone has missed the point of git branches.

It's you. You are the problem.

Eh, this is some weird gatekeeping. Workflow isn't some cargo cult term, it's a reasonable way to describe a set of commands you might do to ensure the sanity of your repositories: mirroring, running custom hooks on precommit, authentication via Gerrit, and more, are part of a workflow. Cloning isn't some mortal evil in git, even in the way that poster described; it's just flat out inefficient and you really only do it as a part of very complicated workflow. For example, the "workflow" for contributing changes to the Go project involves initiating build bots to test your code on different architectures before allowing it through code review. A part of this automated testing involves spinning up VMs somewhere and cloning the repo at a certain revision. This is reasonable and not problematic.

It is true that inefficiently using git probably makes it as useful as CVS in most situations. The reality is that you need to change the way you approach managing your projects to make either of those tools useful. If you like CVS, it's okay.

Coffee Mugshot fucked around with this message at 22:05 on Sep 4, 2017

# ? Sep 4, 2017 21:19

Gazpacho: Jun 18, 2004; by Fluffdaddy; Slippery Tilde

I'm not saying people can't use the term, or can't use workflows, it's just that I'm not too keen on the whole concept.

It reminds me of the way people use the term "design patterns" to mean precisely those patterns handed down in one book by Gamma et al.

Gazpacho fucked around with this message at 22:22 on Sep 4, 2017

# ? Sep 4, 2017 22:08

Bongo Bill: Jan 17, 2012

The concept of... a particular way of using a tool?

# ? Sep 4, 2017 22:16

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

Coffee Mugshot posted:

Eh, this is some weird gatekeeping. Workflow isn't some cargo cult term, it's a reasonable way to describe a set of commands you might do to ensure the sanity of your repositories: mirroring, running custom hooks on precommit, authentication via Gerrit, and more, are part of a workflow. Cloning isn't some mortal evil in git, even in the way that poster described; it's just flat out inefficient and you really only do it as a part of very complicated workflow. For example, the "workflow" for contributing changes to the Go project involves initiating build bots to test your code on different architectures before allowing it through code review. A part of this automated testing involves spinning up VMs somewhere and cloning the repo at a certain revision. This is reasonable and not problematic.

"If you do X you probably don't understand the tool" isn't gatekeeeping, and a CI setup that happens to not cache clones of the repo between runs is completely unrelated to using local clones as part of your development workflow in place of branches.

# ? Sep 5, 2017 00:04

pokeyman: Nov 26, 2006; That elephant ate my entire platoon.

Plorkyeran posted:

Semver.org makes no attempt at defining what an �incompatible API change� is. It certainly doesn�t claim that only things statically detectable count.

I suppose. I retract my assertion that the Elm package manager enforces semver. Instead I will claim that it enforces its own rules about versions, that those rules resemble a statically-enforceable variant of semver, and that that is cool.

# ? Sep 5, 2017 00:46

Coffee Mugshot: Jun 26, 2010; by Lowtax

Plorkyeran posted:

"If you do X you probably don't understand the tool" isn't gatekeeeping

It isn't always, but...

# ? Sep 5, 2017 01:52

Gazpacho: Jun 18, 2004; by Fluffdaddy; Slippery Tilde

Coffee Mugshot posted:

It isn't always, but...

People who get it stuck in their heads that they've "mastered" a tech when they're actually abusing it terribly cause a lot of trouble in the industry, and need to be checked. The attitude is the problem, not the skill level.

# ? Sep 5, 2017 05:43

QuarkJets: Sep 8, 2008

pfft i disagree, i read a book on crypto (titled the Cryptonomicon) and feel totally comfortable rolling my own crypto algorithms

# ? Sep 5, 2017 05:44

boo_radley: Dec 30, 2005; Politeness costs nothing

QuarkJets posted:

pfft i disagree, i read a book on crypto (titled the Cryptonomicon) and feel totally comfortable rolling my own crypto algorithms

"You see, I start with one of the greatest algorithms of all time, given to us by Julius Caesar, and then I add my own 'special sauce' if you will..."

I tried rolling a basic crypto algo from a textbook and wound up introducing some severe memory leaks in my implementation. The ta refused to help me get past my errors, saying that either people get it or they don't, and try again, but go slower. Those were instructive, humbling years for me. :smith:

# ? Sep 5, 2017 05:52

Soricidus: Oct 21, 2010; freedom-hating statist shill

QuarkJets posted:

pfft i disagree, i read a book on crypto (titled the Cryptonomicon) and feel totally comfortable rolling my own crypto algorithms

never mind crypto. whether we go by number of vulnerabilities or by greatest real world impact, the thing you should absolutely never ever do is roll your own user input validation

# ? Sep 5, 2017 11:06

leper khan: Dec 28, 2010; Honest to god thinks Half Life 2 is a bad game. But at least he likes Monster Hunter.

Soricidus posted:

never mind crypto. whether we go by number of vulnerabilities or by greatest real world impact, the thing you should absolutely never ever do is roll your own user input validation

My favorite is when a system will use different email validation functions for sign up, log in, and password recovery.

Utility companies are the worst at IT.

# ? Sep 5, 2017 12:56

PhantomOfTheCopier: Aug 13, 2008; Pikabooze!

leper khan posted:

Utility companies are the worst at IT.

From a user's perspective, I've always found communication companies to be the worst. Phone, Internet, cable, satellite... and popular media provider company, and they will be utterly unable to provide even the most basic information without a six-lawyer login/recovery process. Need to know your settings? You'll have to contact the CEO before you're finished.

First runner up: I was applying for a job at Oracle in 2012. I filled out the online form, clicked submit... and got a full page of database stack traces.

# ? Sep 5, 2017 13:59

TheresaJayne: Jul 1, 2011

PhantomOfTheCopier posted:

First runner up: I was applying for a job at Oracle in 2012. I filled out the online form, clicked submit... and got a full page of database stack traces.

Wasn't that the online Tech Test?

# ? Sep 5, 2017 14:01

ChickenWing: Jul 22, 2010

Gazpacho posted:

People who get it stuck in their heads that they've "mastered" a tech when they're actually abusing it terribly cause a lot of trouble in the industry, and need to be checked. The attitude is the problem, not the skill level.

Dunning-Kruger shows up in the most annoying places

I'm almost universally suspicious of anyone who professes any level of competence in anything. Impostor syndrome or bust

# ? Sep 5, 2017 16:28

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

PhantomOfTheCopier posted:

I was applying for a job at Oracle in 2012.

Horror exists between keyboard and chair

# ? Sep 5, 2017 17:06

TooMuchAbstraction: Oct 14, 2012; I spent four years making
Waves of Steel
Hell yes I'm going to turn my avatar into an ad for it.; Fun Shoe

PhantomOfTheCopier posted:

From a user's perspective, I've always found communication companies to be the worst. Phone, Internet, cable, satellite... and popular media provider company, and they will be utterly unable to provide even the most basic information without a six-lawyer login/recovery process. Need to know your settings? You'll have to contact the CEO before you're finished.

Comcast decided at some point to only accept online accounts if they used an @comcast.net email address. My @gmail.com address that had worked previously no longer worked, and their helpstaff couldn't see why I was refusing to use the nice @comcast.net address they automatically set up for me.

# ? Sep 5, 2017 17:13

CPColin: Sep 9, 2003; Big ol' smile.

Found this in a deeply nested block (slightly censored):

code:

    if (address.Address.Line1.ToString().Trim().Length > 0)
    {
        if (!address.Address.Line1.ToString().ToUpper().Trim().Contains(...) &&
            !address.Address.Line1.ToString().ToUpper().Trim().Contains(...) &&
            !address.Address.Line1.ToString().ToUpper().Trim().Contains(...) &&
            !address.Address.Line1.ToString().ToUpper().Trim().Contains(...) &&
            !address.Address.Line1.ToString().ToUpper().Trim().Contains(...) &&
            !address.Address.Line1.ToString().ToUpper().Trim().Contains(...) &&
            !address.Address.Line1.ToString().ToUpper().Trim().Contains(...) &&
            !address.Address.Line1.ToString().ToUpper().Trim().Contains(...) &&
            !address.Address.Line1.ToString().ToUpper().Trim().Contains(...)) //filter out addresses that aren't real
        {
           ...
        }
    }

This is the list of blocks that currently lead to the above checks: try->switch->case->if->foreach->if/else->if(null). The else case of the if(null) check contains the same exact list of conditionals, with the same exact comment, formatted slightly differently.

Edit: Found a block that's indented 60 spaces in (four per level).

# ? Sep 5, 2017 17:14

TooMuchAbstraction: Oct 14, 2012; I spent four years making
Waves of Steel
Hell yes I'm going to turn my avatar into an ad for it.; Fun Shoe

Convert one of those ToUppers to ToLower and see if anyone notices.

# ? Sep 5, 2017 17:22

Gazpacho: Jun 18, 2004; by Fluffdaddy; Slippery Tilde

excuse me, excuse me, why does an address line have to be converted to a string?

# ? Sep 5, 2017 20:18

Space Kablooey: May 6, 2009

Gazpacho posted:

excuse me, excuse me, why does an address line have to be converted to a string?

that each address line is an object that holds the actual address line, and the ToString() is just a convenient way to get all of the fields in a single call.

# ? Sep 5, 2017 20:46

CPColin: Sep 9, 2003; Big ol' smile.

That was my guess, too, but nope! It's already a string!

# ? Sep 5, 2017 21:18

MisterZimbu: Mar 13, 2006

I love unnecessary string manipulation/conversions. Seen both of these in production code at current job:

code:

int a = 1;  int b = 2;
if (a.ToString() == b.ToString()) { ... }

code:

object result = datareader.GetValue("column");
return Convert.ToInt32(result.ToString());

# ? Sep 5, 2017 21:25

Space Kablooey: May 6, 2009

CPColin posted:

That was my guess, too, but nope! It's already a string!

# ? Sep 5, 2017 21:26

F_Shit_Fitzgerald: Feb 2, 2017

MisterZimbu posted:

I love unnecessary string manipulation/conversions. Seen both of these in production code at current job:
code:
int a = 1;  int b = 2;
if (a.ToString() == b.ToString()) { ... }
code:
object result = datareader.GetValue("column");
return Convert.ToInt32(result.ToString());

Why the hell would you even do this?

# ? Sep 5, 2017 21:28

PhantomOfTheCopier: Aug 13, 2008; Pikabooze!

Spent an hour Sunday "finding" an undocumented behavior in a library, namely that it only parses multipart data from stdin, and skips that step if initialized from an explicit file handle (even if it happens to be stdin). :eng99:

# ? Sep 5, 2017 21:29

MisterZimbu: Mar 13, 2006

F_Shit_Fitzgerald posted:

Why the hell would you even do this?

Because 95% of programmers are not bright people.

# ? Sep 5, 2017 21:29

canis minor: May 4, 2011

MisterZimbu posted:

I love unnecessary string manipulation/conversions. Seen both of these in production code at current job:
code:
int a = 1;  int b = 2;
if (a.ToString() == b.ToString()) { ... }
code:
object result = datareader.GetValue("column");
return Convert.ToInt32(result.ToString());

code:

var a = true; var b = false;
if (String(a) == String(b)){}

# ? Sep 5, 2017 22:12

ChubbyThePhat: Dec 22, 2006; Who nico nico needs anyone else

code:

var a = 1; var b =2;  a/^((?!b).)*$/gm ? {}

Muahahahahahaha

# ? Sep 5, 2017 22:27

F_Shit_Fitzgerald: Feb 2, 2017

MisterZimbu posted:

Because 95% of programmers are not bright people.

And here I've been worried about not being able to make it as a programmer in the "real world" (I'm a hopefully-soon-to-be-graduating CS major). If this is the kind of stuff that gets into production code, I'll probably be fine.

# ? Sep 5, 2017 22:43

TooMuchAbstraction: Oct 14, 2012; I spent four years making
Waves of Steel
Hell yes I'm going to turn my avatar into an ad for it.; Fun Shoe

F_Shit_Fitzgerald posted:

And here I've been worried about not being able to make it as a programmer in the "real world" (I'm a hopefully-soon-to-be-graduating CS major). If this is the kind of stuff that gets into production code, I'll probably be fine.

This poo poo is noteworthy precisely because it's unexpected. Most code is not particularly noteworthy either for shittiness or awesomeness...in a similar sense to how most roads are not notable for being filled with potholes or for being amazing scenic vistas. Write code that gets the job done with a minimum of fuss and you'll be fine.

# ? Sep 5, 2017 22:47

Thermopyle: Jul 1, 2003; ...the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt. �Bertrand Russell

If you're self-aware enough to read the coding horrors thread there's a good chance you're not one of The Bad Ones.

# ? Sep 5, 2017 23:06

PhantomOfTheCopier: Aug 13, 2008; Pikabooze!

F_Shit_Fitzgerald posted:

Why the hell would you even do this?

In the second case, downsampling: I don't care what we store in the database, it's gonna break beyond 32 bits! Woo job security.

# ? Sep 5, 2017 23:22

QuarkJets: Sep 8, 2008

F_Shit_Fitzgerald posted:

Why the hell would you even do this?

The second one could be someone's unfortunate conception of what a floor operator should do when applied to a string

Thermopyle posted:

If you're self-aware enough to read the coding horrors thread there's a good chance you're not one of The Bad Ones.

I think simply reading this thread has made me a better programmer

But like most physicists, I don't actually have any real CS training

# ? Sep 6, 2017 00:14

Linear Zoetrope: Nov 28, 2011; A hero must cook

Though in fairness, almost everyone has probably written at least one or two "oh poo poo this needs to be done by lunch" code that's thread worthy (lovely learning code notwithstanding).

# ? Sep 6, 2017 01:19

PhantomOfTheCopier: Aug 13, 2008; Pikabooze!

Because the industry only cares about "new hotness", it's safe to assume that all production code was written by a novice in the language.

# ? Sep 6, 2017 01:26

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 23, 2024 13:24

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

PhantomOfTheCopier posted:

Because the industry only cares about "new hotness", it's safe to assume that all production code was written by a novice in the language.

God, this is the core of every git argument you had too. Have you ever worked with another seasoned professional ever or have you been managing daycares for 20 years?

# ? Sep 6, 2017 01:34

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 »