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 »

NtotheTC: Dec 31, 2007

Linear Zoetrope posted:

code:


bool TRUE = true
bool FALSE = false

bool x_is_not_y = x != y;

if (x_is_not_y == TRUE) {
    return FALSE;
} else if (x_is_not_y == FALSE) {
    return TRUE;
} else {
    throw "Boolean value is not true or false!";
}

Requirements change in the real world guys jesus

# ? Mar 6, 2019 13:34

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 26, 2024 03:41

kitten emergency: Jan 13, 2008; get meow this wack-ass crystal prison

the last page has demonstrated once again why composition > inheritance

# ? Mar 6, 2019 13:59

Beef: Jul 26, 2004

Cuntpunch posted:

code:
return x != y ? false : true;
Reduced LOC

code:

return __builtin_expect((x!=y),0) ? false : true;

Fixed for continued bandwagon jumping.

# ? Mar 6, 2019 14:29

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

uncurable mlady posted:

the last page has demonstrated once again why composition > inheritance

I can't tell if this is calling me discomposed or inbred, but, either way, shots fired!

# ? Mar 6, 2019 15:25

NihilCredo: Jun 6, 2011; iram omni possibili modo preme:
plus una illa te diffamabit, quam multæ virtutes commendabunt

There is a particular kind of coder who would write it like:

code:

if (x.ToString().ToUpper() == y.ToString().ToUpper()) { return true; } else { return false;}

and then blame the runtime when it doesn't work as they magically expected.

# ? Mar 6, 2019 16:23

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

Opferwurst posted:

Aren't Lists internally implemented as dynamic arrays in .NET? Why do I see people converting them to static arrays? What's the advantage?

If performance is critical and you have a data set of a static size, you can avoid the list having to resize the internal array. It's not a huge cost, but it's certainly not free. After I typed that, I remembered that List also has a constructor that sets the initial capacity, so... maybe not so much.

Also for interop with PowerShell or other .NET languages where it's easier to use primitive types.

# ? Mar 6, 2019 17:03

Cuntpunch: Oct 3, 2003; A monkey in a long line of kings

New Yorp New Yorp posted:

If performance is critical and you have a data set of a static size, you can avoid the list having to resize the internal array. It's not a huge cost, but it's certainly not free. After I typed that, I remembered that List also has a constructor that sets the initial capacity, so... maybe not so much.

Also for interop with PowerShell or other .NET languages where it's easier to use primitive types.

Yeah, if you know a reasonable upper-limit size for your list, initializing it with that size will allocate once at the start. And if for some reason you've underguessed, then internally the capacity is just going to get doubled when you overrun.

# ? Mar 6, 2019 17:25

GABA ghoul: Oct 29, 2011

qsvui posted:

C++ code:

bool _returnValue =false;

if (x == y)
{
  _returnValue =true;
}
else
{
  _returnVaalue = false;
}

return _returnValue;

this is really good code, but I made a small improvement to make it more flexible

# ? Mar 6, 2019 18:19

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

NihilCredo posted:

There is a particular kind of coder who would write it like:
code:
if (x.ToString().ToUpper() == y.ToString().ToUpper()) { return true; } else { return false;}
and then blame the runtime when it doesn't work as they magically expected.

You gotta make it null-safe, like this:

code:

x?.ToString().ToUpper()

Whew, that's better!

# ? Mar 6, 2019 18:36

dick traceroute: Feb 24, 2010; Open the pod bay doors, Hal.; Grimey Drawer

Which languages have null != null?

# ? Mar 6, 2019 19:22

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

IEEE 754

# ? Mar 6, 2019 19:31

Doom Mathematic: Sep 2, 2008

null isn't the same as NaN.

Linear Zoetrope posted:

code:

bool x_is_not_y = x != y;

if (x_is_not_y == true) {
    return false;
} else if (x_is_not_y == false) {
    return true;
} else {
    throw "Boolean value is not true or false!";
}

Want to see how they got to 100% coverage on that one.

# ? Mar 6, 2019 19:42

taqueso: Mar 8, 2004

I'm a little worried about the return value, we should make sure it is in range:

pre:

assert(_returnValue == true || _returnValue == false, "Invalid return bool!!");

(These are in Java right? I don't know how to write this in java, probably something with an assertFactory)

# ? Mar 6, 2019 19:43

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

dick traceroute posted:

Which languages have null != null?

SQL

# ? Mar 6, 2019 20:11

Joda: Apr 24, 2010; When I'm off, I just like to really let go and have fun, y'know?; Fun Shoe

pokeyman posted:

SQL

Woudln't that be null <> null? (I still get a headache when I run into that operator, it's like whoever did it just made it different to be contrarian)

# ? Mar 6, 2019 20:12

SupSuper: Apr 8, 2009; At the Heart of the city is an Alien horror, so vile and so powerful that not even death can claim it.

You're overcomplicating it.

code:

return !(x - y);

# ? Mar 6, 2019 21:09

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

Joda posted:

Woudln't that be null <> null? (I still get a headache when I run into that operator, it's like whoever did it just made it different to be contrarian)

Depends on the platform. MSSQL has the IS/IS NOT NULL keyword which gets hinky with empty string depending on the data type

# ? Mar 6, 2019 21:10

Hammerite: Mar 9, 2007; And you don't remember what I said here, either, but it was pompous and stupid.; Jade Ear Joe

pokeyman posted:

SQL

http://sqlfiddle.com/#!17/9eecb/26296

# ? Mar 6, 2019 21:23

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

Doom Mathematic posted:

null isn't the same as NaN.

so? 0x00000000 != 0x80000000

# ? Mar 6, 2019 22:09

Jazerus: May 24, 2011

what we really need here is a BoolFactoryBeanFactory

# ? Mar 6, 2019 22:14

Doom Mathematic: Sep 2, 2008

JawnV6 posted:

so? 0x00000000 != 0x80000000

So, null isn't part of IEEE 754.

# ? Mar 6, 2019 22:45

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

dick traceroute posted:

Which languages have null != null?

Unity overwrites ==

This means that == and != will �work� but ?. will not for anything that inherits UnityEngine.Object

# ? Mar 6, 2019 23:26

Tann: Apr 1, 2009

I thought I'd share a few of the horrors from my current job. Standard Java enterprise junk, there's a lot of code from about 5 years ago that's very suspect. I've cleaned up a lot of it but some sticks in my mind.

Inside Constants.java:

code:

public static final Integer ZERO = 0;
public static final Integer ONE = 1;
public static final Integer TWO = 2;
public static final Integer THREE = 3;
...
// some random other constants inbetween, some of which references these numbers!
...
public static final Integer EIGHT = 8;
....
// some more random constants
...
public static final Integer TEN = 10;

Inside some entity that's mapped to a DB table. I think it was coming in as ints from a frontend thing so they decided to store it as both???

code:

private Boolean onMonday;

private Integer onMondayValue;

private Boolean onTuesday;

private Integer onTuesdayValue;

// all the way to Sunday!

We also had a way of crashing the server by adding 10 rows and removing 10 rows from this customisable form on the frontend. It was calling the server to find the html it should display each time you edited it and there was a bug which caused some list to multiply in size each time.

Plus someone dropped a production schema last year! I'm very glad it happened to someone else and I consider it an incredible learning experience that I will take with me for the rest of my life.

# ? Mar 6, 2019 23:37

Che Delilas: Nov 23, 2009; FREE TIBET WEED

Jazerus posted:

what we really need here is a BoolFactoryBeanFactory

You fool, how are we supposed to inject implementations of those factories? And we don't want to maintain more than one instance, so we'll need a convenient superclass for creating singletons of it.

AbstractSingltonBoolFactoryBeanAbstractFactory

# ? Mar 7, 2019 02:29

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

I don't know if it's a Coding Horror or a Coding Awesome, but I was doing something else and came across this simple convert units call:

code:

private decimal GetCentimerte(blah)

And it immediately spawned in my head... THE HUNDRED DEATHS - CENTIMEURTE

# ? Mar 7, 2019 03:13

hackbunny: Jul 22, 2007; I haven't been on SA for years but the person who gave me my previous av as a joke felt guilty for doing so and decided to get me a non-shitty av

Opferwurst posted:

Aren't Lists internally implemented as dynamic arrays in .NET? Why do I see people converting them to static arrays? What's the advantage?

No advantage. In fact, converting to a static array takes extra memory (the new array object) and extra execution time (copying items from the list to the array). Behind a List/IList you can hide all sorts of optimizations, like preallocating larger arrays to allow for expansion, or using multiple arrays for storage. A .NET array, on the other hand, is extremely inflexible: it has a fixed size and all items are world-accessible (and world-writable!). You can't efficiently build an array item by item: you have to keep the list of elements somewhere else (... like a List), allocate an array of the right size, and then copy the elements to it. As a general rule, never use arrays unless you have a really good reason

# ? Mar 7, 2019 03:37

Night Shade: Jan 13, 2013; Old School

hackbunny posted:

No advantage. In fact, converting to a static array takes extra memory (the new array object) and extra execution time (copying items from the list to the array). Behind a List/IList you can hide all sorts of optimizations, like preallocating larger arrays to allow for expansion, or using multiple arrays for storage. A .NET array, on the other hand, is extremely inflexible: it has a fixed size and all items are world-accessible (and world-writable!). You can't efficiently build an array item by item: you have to keep the list of elements somewhere else (... like a List), allocate an array of the right size, and then copy the elements to it. As a general rule, never use arrays unless you have a really good reason

hey neat, now i have a new weekend project, an ArrayPool<> and Span<> backed IList implementation

# ? Mar 7, 2019 04:10

Cuntpunch: Oct 3, 2003; A monkey in a long line of kings

code:

//C#

public bool ValidationThing()
{
	var validations = new Dictionary<string,bool>
	{
		{"validationA", validateA()},
		{"validationB", validateB()},
		//etc etc.
	}

	return validations.All(validation => validation.Value);
}

# ? Mar 7, 2019 16:23

Hammerite: Mar 9, 2007; And you don't remember what I said here, either, but it was pompous and stupid.; Jade Ear Joe

Cuntpunch posted:

code:

//C#

public bool ValidationThing()
{
	var validations = new Dictionary<string,bool>
	{
		{"validationA", validateA()},
		{"validationB", validateB()},
		//etc etc.
	}

	return validations.All(validation => validation.Value);
}

This is a bit gratuitous, and if you're going to go to the trouble of structuring things this much then it should probably be a class instead of a dictionary, but it's not really a horror. I can see how something would end up like this if the dev found themselves having to frequently debug through whatever this is. Or a piece of code that had more of a reason to use a dictionary could have ended up this way after a few changes without rationalizing things.

Also ValidationThing() is not a good name for this method but I assume that's just you anonymizing this code

# ? Mar 7, 2019 16:46

Cuntpunch: Oct 3, 2003; A monkey in a long line of kings

Hammerite posted:

This is a bit gratuitous, and if you're going to go to the trouble of structuring things this much then it should probably be a class instead of a dictionary, but it's not really a horror. I can see how something would end up like this if the dev found themselves having to frequently debug through whatever this is. Or a piece of code that had more of a reason to use a dictionary could have ended up this way after a few changes without rationalizing things.

Also ValidationThing() is not a good name for this method but I assume that's just you anonymizing this code

The names are anonymized, but the structure is that. There's literally nothing trimmed out (except the 4 or 5 other validation methods). But a Dictionary where you never actually use the Keys?

On the second pass it turned into a List<bool>. All just to be able to use LINQ's All() method.

The problem there being is that unlike simply doing

code:

 return validateA() && validateB() //etc

By pre-calling everything you don't get any valuable short-circuiting logic.

# ? Mar 7, 2019 17:11

Hammerite: Mar 9, 2007; And you don't remember what I said here, either, but it was pompous and stupid.; Jade Ear Joe

Cuntpunch posted:

The names are anonymized, but the structure is that. There's literally nothing trimmed out (except the 4 or 5 other validation methods). But a Dictionary where you never actually use the Keys?

That's why I speculated that they had had to use it a lot while debugging. It looks like something you might come up with if you wanted to look at the results of all those methods with the debugger attached.

# ? Mar 7, 2019 18:15

HappyHippo: Nov 19, 2003; Do you have an Air Miles Card?

Cuntpunch posted:

By pre-calling everything you don't get any valuable short-circuiting logic.

That could potentially be a feature, again if you're looking at this in the debugger

# ? Mar 7, 2019 19:12

Carbon dioxide: Oct 9, 2012

Microsoft open-sourced their calc.exe source code.

https://github.com/Microsoft/calculator

It is full of coding horrors.

Also, it phones home with statistical usage data.

Also people are leaving funny PRs and stuff now. https://github.com/Microsoft/calculator/pull/158/files

# ? Mar 7, 2019 19:54

raminasi: Jan 25, 2005; a last drink with no ice

New Microsoft definitely has some fun moments, gotta say.

# ? Mar 7, 2019 21:00

Kazinsal: Dec 13, 2011

I do like that we're basically seeing from open sourced Windows components like this what everyone who thinks things through past "TELEMETRY EVIL NSA SPYWARE" expected: they're looking at poo poo like how many people actually use the memory and bitflip features in the calculator.

# ? Mar 7, 2019 21:18

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

Telyra posted:

I do like that we're basically seeing from open sourced Windows components like this what everyone who thinks things through past "TELEMETRY EVIL NSA SPYWARE" expected: they're looking at poo poo like how many people actually use the memory and bitflip features in the calculator.

Probably also crash reports, right?

# ? Mar 7, 2019 22:34

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

Telyra posted:

I do like that we're basically seeing from open sourced Windows components like this what everyone who thinks things through past "TELEMETRY EVIL NSA SPYWARE" expected: they're looking at poo poo like how many people actually use the memory and bitflip features in the calculator.

Plus the ever valuable Troll Deterrent:
https://github.com/Microsoft/calculator/pull/156

# ? Mar 7, 2019 22:55

Suspicious Dish: Sep 24, 2011; 2020 is the year of linux on the desktop, bro; Fun Shoe

the only time i saw someone go OMG TERRIBLE CODE was for a 10-line class that wrapped std::vector to remove exceptions from the API. i mean it pulls in Windows.ApplicationModel.Calls.CallPhoneContract for seemingly no reason and takes 150ms to lay out the UI but thats just XAML being terrible not the calc app.

in theory you should be able to use /EHsc to disable exceptions, but then you cant use modern C++ with it https://developercommunity.visualstudio.com/content/problem/341669/c-include-has-a-warning-out-of-the-box-c4530-in-pp.html

# ? Mar 7, 2019 23:18

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

loving hell seeing that screenshot on the calc repo reminded me just how hideous "modern windows apps" are. vast and featureless rectangles of uniform gray, with randomly sized text scattered around in slightly different shades of gray. it's like someone looked at an x11 gui from 1985 and said "hmm, the only problem i can see with this is that there's just too much contrast"

bring back aero, or at least the concept of having ui designers who make a basic effort to make things pleasing to look at.

# ? Mar 7, 2019 23:44

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 26, 2024 03:41

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

yeah, calc.exe is hilariously slow to open. I always laugh a little bit when I have to use it.

Good thing its basically the only "modern" app I use, because I'd just be laughing non stop.

# ? Mar 8, 2019 00:15

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 »