|
dev bootcamp instructor posted:
|
# ? Oct 18, 2017 04:26 |
|
|
# ? May 25, 2024 14:34 |
|
KernelSlanders posted:
I can only hope that this is code accessing a really poorly designed database
|
# ? Oct 18, 2017 04:38 |
|
LDAP It is ... a true horror. Now how the gently caress do I give anyone but the root account permissions to add more users. (Edit: Also, it's loving black magic and I love it.) Ranzear fucked around with this message at 06:40 on Oct 18, 2017 |
# ? Oct 18, 2017 06:27 |
|
Just accidentally made a commit message rhyme and didn't realize until after it was too late
|
# ? Oct 18, 2017 16:46 |
|
I’m so glad I stay away from promises as much as possible.
|
# ? Oct 18, 2017 16:51 |
|
is the horror here using jquery ajax in 2017?
|
# ? Oct 18, 2017 16:56 |
|
Rubellavator posted:We joked about autogenerating a class that is x times larger than the codebase that just counts to a million or something with a single test to cover it. It would probably crash due to having too much code in one method/class. Hell, I think that problem was shown in this thread just recently. I just like to bring it up because that's just one of those things that messes with people. "You mean that's a thing?"
|
# ? Oct 18, 2017 16:56 |
|
Tomie knows me posted:is the horror here using jquery ajax in 2017? That and putting a function that already uses the promise API inside another promise unnecessarily when the second layer doesn't do anything to the returned data
|
# ? Oct 18, 2017 17:19 |
|
Dross posted:That and putting a function that already uses the promise API inside another promise unnecessarily when the second layer doesn't do anything to the returned data jQuery doesn't use the real promise API, though
|
# ? Oct 18, 2017 18:05 |
|
Is that really relevant here? Like is there an actual good reason for doing it the quoted way when you can chain .then and .catch off of a returned AJAX call or include them in a Promise.all the same as any other promise?
|
# ? Oct 18, 2017 18:41 |
|
Pollyanna posted:I’m so glad I stay away from promises as much as possible. Promises are great
|
# ? Oct 18, 2017 19:41 |
|
necrotic posted:Promises are great Better than callbacks, that's for sure.
|
# ? Oct 18, 2017 20:54 |
|
Pollyanna posted:I’m so glad I stay away from promises as much as possible. You also had a similar sentiment to switch statements. I don't really think programming is about avoiding completely harmless/innocuous things because someone blogged about it affecting their performance once.
|
# ? Oct 18, 2017 23:04 |
|
Coffee Mugshot posted:You also had a similar sentiment to switch statements. I don't really think programming is about avoiding completely harmless/innocuous things because someone blogged about it affecting their performance once. True. I guess I worded that badly - it's moreso that I have no loving clue what's going on there so it's really on me.
|
# ? Oct 18, 2017 23:27 |
|
From the AMD CPU thread,repiv posted:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UMzXMvOaTZk Why yes, I always install XAMPP with my drivers. Keep watching, it gets worse. McGlockenshire fucked around with this message at 00:49 on Oct 19, 2017 |
# ? Oct 19, 2017 00:47 |
|
Sounds like standard HP SCSI controller software
|
# ? Oct 19, 2017 01:54 |
|
necrotic posted:Promises are great And once you're using promises, you're a simple step away from using async/await which is fantastic.
|
# ? Oct 19, 2017 02:36 |
|
The Dark Wind posted:And once you're using promises, you're a simple step away from using async/await which is fantastic. Where did async/await originate? I remember using it in C# a few years ago (with try/catch, which works really with JS async/await), and it seems to have become more common.
|
# ? Oct 19, 2017 05:34 |
|
Odette posted:Where did async/await originate? I remember using it in C# a few years ago (with try/catch, which works really with JS async/await), and it seems to have become more common. C# introduced the async / await keywords. They were inspired by the F# async {} expression, which had been around for a few years then; though C# async/await is a strictly ad-hoc, compiler-level implementation of what in F# is just a library-level feature that uses the language's generic wrapper and unwrapper syntax ({} and let!, respectively). In fact, some F# libraries have since taken to including an alternative task {} expression for easier C# interop and better performance. NihilCredo fucked around with this message at 07:25 on Oct 19, 2017 |
# ? Oct 19, 2017 07:15 |
|
promises are fine but oaths are definitely better eternal moral vigilance transcends all other features
|
# ? Oct 19, 2017 07:31 |
|
Watch out for my new polyfill library, pinkyswear.js
|
# ? Oct 19, 2017 07:35 |
|
Suspicious Dish posted:Watch out for my new polyfill library, pinkyswear.js ?
|
# ? Oct 19, 2017 09:04 |
|
gently caress me
|
# ? Oct 19, 2017 09:08 |
|
Suspicious Dish posted:gently caress me I'd do this if programming knowledge was an STD.
|
# ? Oct 19, 2017 11:50 |
|
QuarkJets posted:promises are fine but oaths are definitely better
|
# ? Oct 19, 2017 12:15 |
|
Dross posted:Is that really relevant here? Like is there an actual good reason for doing it the quoted way when you can chain .then and .catch off of a returned AJAX call or include them in a Promise.all the same as any other promise? If you're using Promises elsewhere, it's worth wrapping the nonstandard Promise-alike so you don't have to think about it later, but I'm not going to claim that's the least bad way to do it. Suspicious Dish posted:gently caress me lol
|
# ? Oct 19, 2017 14:03 |
|
Stackoverflow posted:> How would I go about setting the position of a JavaScript object using HTML/CSS. quote:To center an html element horizontally, I think the easiest way would be margin: auto. To center it vertically, there's always flexbox. If you want to use javascript (probably more cross-browser):
|
# ? Oct 19, 2017 16:25 |
|
Just got here from "Funny Forum Quotes" and am really upset that I didn't know about this entire subforum while I spent the whole week struggling with Promises code making an express server. I ended up just making them all happen in a serial way.
|
# ? Oct 19, 2017 18:08 |
|
Jesus Christ there's so much horror to unravel here.
|
# ? Oct 19, 2017 22:07 |
|
Hey guys, long time lurker, first time code-shamer. I'm doing a code review for a contractor and while this isn't the worst code I've ever seen from this particular individual, it's also baffling just how much pointless complexity has been added here: code:
|
# ? Oct 20, 2017 09:54 |
|
how broken does your brain have to be to always think in opposites like that
|
# ? Oct 20, 2017 11:47 |
|
AstuteCat posted:Hey guys, long time lurker, first time code-shamer. Please present the award that your avatar has to the person who wrote that. Thank you.
|
# ? Oct 20, 2017 15:15 |
|
AstuteCat posted:
I think this is my favorite part. Did your finger slide off the shift key and you wrote ',' instead of '<'? Looks like your answer is true!
|
# ? Oct 20, 2017 15:23 |
|
Best part is checking if a > b && a != b, you know, just in case! Sometimes 9 is the same as 8 even after it's been determined that it's greater. You gotta watch that edge case. Is this all they meant to do? code:
Happy Thread fucked around with this message at 18:16 on Oct 20, 2017 |
# ? Oct 20, 2017 16:22 |
|
Dumb Lowtax posted:Best part is checking if a > b && a != b, you know, just in case! Sometimes 9 is the same as 8 even after it's been determined that it's greater. You gotta watch that edge case. Yes. That is all that this function, far as I can tell, is intended to do. Fake Edit: Update on the code review that should have really been over with by now: Edit: I think what makes this particular egregious is that he actually has the operators in the switch statement -- like, they are RIGHT THERE. AstuteCat fucked around with this message at 16:42 on Oct 20, 2017 |
# ? Oct 20, 2017 16:32 |
|
E: dumb me
|
# ? Oct 20, 2017 16:56 |
|
AstuteCat posted:Edit: I think what makes this particular egregious is that he actually has the operators in the switch statement -- like, they are RIGHT THERE. Click that "Create JIRA issue" link and title it, "Remove (employee)'s JIRA access."
|
# ? Oct 20, 2017 17:05 |
|
Send them the equivalent short code and make them justify why it's any longer I'd love to see their code surrounding this
|
# ? Oct 20, 2017 17:10 |
|
AstuteCat posted:Yes. That is all that this function, far as I can tell, is intended to do. Well you wouldn't want your bools backwards would you?!
|
# ? Oct 20, 2017 17:20 |
|
|
# ? May 25, 2024 14:34 |
|
Just have them change the code and if their unit tests still pass then they will understand right?
|
# ? Oct 20, 2017 17:30 |