This is just for the laugh of it.
-
Why not? If it was worth mentioning that the profession of the "developer" in question is, it's worth mentioning what the sex of the person is. Well done on nitpicking. Feminist pricks.
Rsole
I still remember having to write your own code in FORTRAN rather than be a cut and paste merchant being pampered by colour coded Intellisense - ahh proper programming - those were the days :)
-
Hi. Background: Co-Worker, (Female <- not biased, just stating the fact), Qualification: Architect... (btw, this is all C# VS2008 code, I swear) Ok, one for the count:
public static bool NameExists (string name)
{
bool exists = false;
int i = 0;
while ((i < someListContainingNames.Count) && (exists == false))
{
if (someListContainingNames[i] == filename)
{
exists = true;
}
i++;
}
return exists;
}Please see if you can read this... (Original code kept):
else if ( ((isEXEDLL == true) || (isEXEConfig == true)) && ((staysTheSameEXEDLL == false) || (EXEDLLPathExistsSoCanProcess == true)) ) { if ( ((isEXEDLL == true) || (isEXEConfig == true)) && (staysTheSameEXEDLL == false) ) { if (canCopy.DoCopy == true) {Spot the redundency (Regex's left out):
string str = ""; string str2 = ""; Regex regex1 = new Regex(regex1String, RegexOptions.IgnoreCase); Regex regex2 = new Regex(regex2String, RegexOptions.IgnoreCase); Regex regex3 = new Regex(regex3String, RegexOptions.IgnoreCase); Regex regex4 = new Regex(regex4String, RegexOptions.IgnoreCase); if (regex1.IsMatch(filename)) { str = regex1.Match(filename).Groups\["code"\].Value.ToUpper(); str2 = regex1.Match(filename).Groups\["type"\].Value.ToUpper(); } else if (regex2.IsMatch(filename)) { str = regex2.Match(filename).Groups\["code"\].Value.ToUpper(); str2 = regex2.Match(filename).Groups\["type"\].Value.ToUpper(); } else if (regex3.IsMatch(filename)) { str = regex3.Match(filename).Groups\["code"\].Value.ToUpper(); str2 = regex3.Match(filename).Groups\["type"\].Value.ToUpper(); } else if (regex4.IsMatch(filename)) { str = regex4.Match(filename).Groups\["code"\].Value.ToUpper(); str2 = regex4.Match(filename).Groups\["type"\].Value.ToUpper(); } else { str = ""; str2 = ""; } if ( (regex1.IsMatch(filename)) || (regex2.IsMatch(filename)) || (regex3.IsMatch(filename)) || (regex4.IsMatch(filename)) )else if ( ((isEXEDLL == true) || (isEXEConfig == true)) && ((staysTheSameEXEDLL == false) || (EXEDLLPathExistsSoCanProcess == true)) ) { if ( ((isEXEDLL == true) || (isEXEConfig == true)) && (staysTheSameEXEDLL == false) ) { if (canCopy.DoCopy == true) {
I'm faint ! :doh:
-Malli...! :rose:****
-
adamsappel wrote:
Female <- not biased, just stating the fact
Then why did you mention it? :mad:
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
-
Rsole
I still remember having to write your own code in FORTRAN rather than be a cut and paste merchant being pampered by colour coded Intellisense - ahh proper programming - those were the days :)
Such a nice quote. Seriously, I feel your pain. :( PS: I'm not an "Rsole" (PPS: is it still 'an' and not 'a' when using illegal abreviations, whilst being a little hipocritical with your quote?)
-
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 ! ;P )
-Malli...! :rose:****
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... :)
-
Such a nice quote. Seriously, I feel your pain. :( PS: I'm not an "Rsole" (PPS: is it still 'an' and not 'a' when using illegal abreviations, whilst being a little hipocritical with your quote?)
adamsappel wrote:
PS: I'm not an "Rsole"
What, exactly, is an Rsole?? :confused:
-
Hi. Background: Co-Worker, (Female <- not biased, just stating the fact), Qualification: Architect... (btw, this is all C# VS2008 code, I swear) Ok, one for the count:
public static bool NameExists (string name)
{
bool exists = false;
int i = 0;
while ((i < someListContainingNames.Count) && (exists == false))
{
if (someListContainingNames[i] == filename)
{
exists = true;
}
i++;
}
return exists;
}Please see if you can read this... (Original code kept):
else if ( ((isEXEDLL == true) || (isEXEConfig == true)) && ((staysTheSameEXEDLL == false) || (EXEDLLPathExistsSoCanProcess == true)) ) { if ( ((isEXEDLL == true) || (isEXEConfig == true)) && (staysTheSameEXEDLL == false) ) { if (canCopy.DoCopy == true) {Spot the redundency (Regex's left out):
string str = ""; string str2 = ""; Regex regex1 = new Regex(regex1String, RegexOptions.IgnoreCase); Regex regex2 = new Regex(regex2String, RegexOptions.IgnoreCase); Regex regex3 = new Regex(regex3String, RegexOptions.IgnoreCase); Regex regex4 = new Regex(regex4String, RegexOptions.IgnoreCase); if (regex1.IsMatch(filename)) { str = regex1.Match(filename).Groups\["code"\].Value.ToUpper(); str2 = regex1.Match(filename).Groups\["type"\].Value.ToUpper(); } else if (regex2.IsMatch(filename)) { str = regex2.Match(filename).Groups\["code"\].Value.ToUpper(); str2 = regex2.Match(filename).Groups\["type"\].Value.ToUpper(); } else if (regex3.IsMatch(filename)) { str = regex3.Match(filename).Groups\["code"\].Value.ToUpper(); str2 = regex3.Match(filename).Groups\["type"\].Value.ToUpper(); } else if (regex4.IsMatch(filename)) { str = regex4.Match(filename).Groups\["code"\].Value.ToUpper(); str2 = regex4.Match(filename).Groups\["type"\].Value.ToUpper(); } else { str = ""; str2 = ""; } if ( (regex1.IsMatch(filename)) || (regex2.IsMatch(filename)) || (regex3.IsMatch(filename)) || (regex4.IsMatch(filename)) )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). :doh:
-
adamsappel wrote:
PS: I'm not an "Rsole"
What, exactly, is an Rsole?? :confused:
Say the first letter on it's own.
Deja View - the feeling that you've seen this post before.
-
Why not? If it was worth mentioning that the profession of the "developer" in question is, it's worth mentioning what the sex of the person is. Well done on nitpicking. Feminist pricks.
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.
Deja View - the feeling that you've seen this post before.
-
Say the first letter on it's own.
Deja View - the feeling that you've seen this post before.
Jeez, is that the letter 'a'? :laugh:
"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
-
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.
Deja View - the feeling that you've seen this post before.
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
-
Say the first letter on it's own.
Deja View - the feeling that you've seen this post before.
Pete O'Hanlon wrote:
Say the first letter on it's own.
oK :laugh:
-
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.
Deja View - the feeling that you've seen this post before.
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*%$ing head without so much as a backward glance if I even peep about her code being (unreadable) and men and woman are just different. That's a fact. Programming is basically a text representation of a train of thought of an individual within a certain set of rules. And men and woman just don't think the same, don't have the same goals, don't have the same set of rules, don't have the same taste in beverage, don't have the same anatomy (although, I do have a nice pair of tits, that may come in handy), and so on and so forth. You can kindof see the direction I'm pointing myself in here, going for the "ignorance" plea. Feminists? Man, I hate feminists. I hate racists. I hate all types of "-ists", especially those that grow on my ass(cysts, you get it?). Taking it too far. If the situation were turned around, you won't see people berating me about being a, what, hipocrit?
-
It's called: "being ironic", feminist pricks? blah... In my limited years of coding, I have found that female code, must not be maintained. It will work and most of the time you can build over it, but (and yes, she does have a very nice one), working with a man, who wrote such code, I would seriously (and surely you agree) kick him in the nads, even if he were a priest by proffesion. A woman on the other hand would cut of my f*%$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?
-
Hi. Background: Co-Worker, (Female <- not biased, just stating the fact), Qualification: Architect... (btw, this is all C# VS2008 code, I swear) Ok, one for the count:
public static bool NameExists (string name)
{
bool exists = false;
int i = 0;
while ((i < someListContainingNames.Count) && (exists == false))
{
if (someListContainingNames[i] == filename)
{
exists = true;
}
i++;
}
return exists;
}Please see if you can read this... (Original code kept):
else if ( ((isEXEDLL == true) || (isEXEConfig == true)) && ((staysTheSameEXEDLL == false) || (EXEDLLPathExistsSoCanProcess == true)) ) { if ( ((isEXEDLL == true) || (isEXEConfig == true)) && (staysTheSameEXEDLL == false) ) { if (canCopy.DoCopy == true) {Spot the redundency (Regex's left out):
string str = ""; string str2 = ""; Regex regex1 = new Regex(regex1String, RegexOptions.IgnoreCase); Regex regex2 = new Regex(regex2String, RegexOptions.IgnoreCase); Regex regex3 = new Regex(regex3String, RegexOptions.IgnoreCase); Regex regex4 = new Regex(regex4String, RegexOptions.IgnoreCase); if (regex1.IsMatch(filename)) { str = regex1.Match(filename).Groups\["code"\].Value.ToUpper(); str2 = regex1.Match(filename).Groups\["type"\].Value.ToUpper(); } else if (regex2.IsMatch(filename)) { str = regex2.Match(filename).Groups\["code"\].Value.ToUpper(); str2 = regex2.Match(filename).Groups\["type"\].Value.ToUpper(); } else if (regex3.IsMatch(filename)) { str = regex3.Match(filename).Groups\["code"\].Value.ToUpper(); str2 = regex3.Match(filename).Groups\["type"\].Value.ToUpper(); } else if (regex4.IsMatch(filename)) { str = regex4.Match(filename).Groups\["code"\].Value.ToUpper(); str2 = regex4.Match(filename).Groups\["type"\].Value.ToUpper(); } else { str = ""; str2 = ""; } if ( (regex1.IsMatch(filename)) || (regex2.IsMatch(filename)) || (regex3.IsMatch(filename)) || (regex4.IsMatch(filename)) ) -
adamsappel wrote:
Female <- not biased, just stating the fact
Then why did you mention it? :mad:
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
-
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). :doh:
-
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" :laugh:
-
Hi. Background: Co-Worker, (Female <- not biased, just stating the fact), Qualification: Architect... (btw, this is all C# VS2008 code, I swear) Ok, one for the count:
public static bool NameExists (string name)
{
bool exists = false;
int i = 0;
while ((i < someListContainingNames.Count) && (exists == false))
{
if (someListContainingNames[i] == filename)
{
exists = true;
}
i++;
}
return exists;
}Please see if you can read this... (Original code kept):
else if ( ((isEXEDLL == true) || (isEXEConfig == true)) && ((staysTheSameEXEDLL == false) || (EXEDLLPathExistsSoCanProcess == true)) ) { if ( ((isEXEDLL == true) || (isEXEConfig == true)) && (staysTheSameEXEDLL == false) ) { if (canCopy.DoCopy == true) {Spot the redundency (Regex's left out):
string str = ""; string str2 = ""; Regex regex1 = new Regex(regex1String, RegexOptions.IgnoreCase); Regex regex2 = new Regex(regex2String, RegexOptions.IgnoreCase); Regex regex3 = new Regex(regex3String, RegexOptions.IgnoreCase); Regex regex4 = new Regex(regex4String, RegexOptions.IgnoreCase); if (regex1.IsMatch(filename)) { str = regex1.Match(filename).Groups\["code"\].Value.ToUpper(); str2 = regex1.Match(filename).Groups\["type"\].Value.ToUpper(); } else if (regex2.IsMatch(filename)) { str = regex2.Match(filename).Groups\["code"\].Value.ToUpper(); str2 = regex2.Match(filename).Groups\["type"\].Value.ToUpper(); } else if (regex3.IsMatch(filename)) { str = regex3.Match(filename).Groups\["code"\].Value.ToUpper(); str2 = regex3.Match(filename).Groups\["type"\].Value.ToUpper(); } else if (regex4.IsMatch(filename)) { str = regex4.Match(filename).Groups\["code"\].Value.ToUpper(); str2 = regex4.Match(filename).Groups\["type"\].Value.ToUpper(); } else { str = ""; str2 = ""; } if ( (regex1.IsMatch(filename)) || (regex2.IsMatch(filename)) || (regex3.IsMatch(filename)) || (regex4.IsMatch(filename)) )