The dev was fired but the havoc is left for us to fix...
-
-
That the deserves a troll kick where the sun does not shine out of the window and through the windshield of his car. So in my book he got away with "murder".
Alberto Bar-Noy --------------- “The city’s central computer told you? R2D2, you know better than to trust a strange computer!” (C3PO)
-
[rant] If forecolor red then disable(control) else if forecolor black then enable(control) [/rant] :mad::mad::mad:
Alberto Bar-Noy --------------- “The city’s central computer told you? R2D2, you know better than to trust a strange computer!” (C3PO)
-
Darwin award on brilliant coding.
Alberto Bar-Noy --------------- “The city’s central computer told you? R2D2, you know better than to trust a strange computer!” (C3PO)
-
Or for discussion in the back-room
No matter how long he who laughs last laughs, he who laughs first has a head start!
I heard that had been deleted along with Ian Botham.
-
I heard that had been deleted along with Ian Botham.
-
[rant] If forecolor red then disable(control) else if forecolor black then enable(control) [/rant] :mad::mad::mad:
Alberto Bar-Noy --------------- “The city’s central computer told you? R2D2, you know better than to trust a strange computer!” (C3PO)
The most annoying thing about cr@ppy code like that is that it usually works. Any self-respecting computer should billow forth plumes of black smoke on meeting such drivel.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
-
[rant] If forecolor red then disable(control) else if forecolor black then enable(control) [/rant] :mad::mad::mad:
Alberto Bar-Noy --------------- “The city’s central computer told you? R2D2, you know better than to trust a strange computer!” (C3PO)
"If forecolor red then disable(control) else if forecolor black then enable(control)" Oooh sounds like a system I had to suffer/work on; not the Credit Derivative VB code at a certain north American bank?! Except, that used colour to denote state, so the controls could be any one of about 6 different colours...
-
-
[rant] If forecolor red then disable(control) else if forecolor black then enable(control) [/rant] :mad::mad::mad:
Alberto Bar-Noy --------------- “The city’s central computer told you? R2D2, you know better than to trust a strange computer!” (C3PO)
Well, I had the same, but the color was PapayaWhip... :(
-
The most annoying thing about cr@ppy code like that is that it usually works. Any self-respecting computer should billow forth plumes of black smoke on meeting such drivel.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
Works... well more like touch and go... as in touch the color in the themes and there goes the functionality
Alberto Bar-Noy --------------- “The city’s central computer told you? R2D2, you know better than to trust a strange computer!” (C3PO)
-
[rant] If forecolor red then disable(control) else if forecolor black then enable(control) [/rant] :mad::mad::mad:
Alberto Bar-Noy --------------- “The city’s central computer told you? R2D2, you know better than to trust a strange computer!” (C3PO)
lol, if it works, it works. If you're alone on the project, and get fired, your replacements deserve to go through hell.
-
[rant] If forecolor red then disable(control) else if forecolor black then enable(control) [/rant] :mad::mad::mad:
Alberto Bar-Noy --------------- “The city’s central computer told you? R2D2, you know better than to trust a strange computer!” (C3PO)
My favourite was "delete this" in a class destructor. Hours of ROFL on that one.
Life is like a s**t sandwich; the more bread you have, the less s**t you eat.
-
[rant] If forecolor red then disable(control) else if forecolor black then enable(control) [/rant] :mad::mad::mad:
Alberto Bar-Noy --------------- “The city’s central computer told you? R2D2, you know better than to trust a strange computer!” (C3PO)
-
Color-blind users need not apply... It seems that just introducing constants for the colors could help with readability. public const Color NotApplicable = Color.Red but I am pretty sure that this one liner just scrapes the surface.
It is beyond that. Who bases control state based upon its adjacent text color?????
Alberto Bar-Noy --------------- “The city’s central computer told you? R2D2, you know better than to trust a strange computer!” (C3PO)
-
"If forecolor red then disable(control) else if forecolor black then enable(control)" Oooh sounds like a system I had to suffer/work on; not the Credit Derivative VB code at a certain north American bank?! Except, that used colour to denote state, so the controls could be any one of about 6 different colours...
Nope not even close.
Alberto Bar-Noy --------------- “The city’s central computer told you? R2D2, you know better than to trust a strange computer!” (C3PO)
-
lol, if it works, it works. If you're alone on the project, and get fired, your replacements deserve to go through hell.
Ah, so it WAS you!
-
It is beyond that. Who bases control state based upon its adjacent text color?????
Alberto Bar-Noy --------------- “The city’s central computer told you? R2D2, you know better than to trust a strange computer!” (C3PO)
-
It is beyond that. Who bases control state based upon its adjacent text color?????
Alberto Bar-Noy --------------- “The city’s central computer told you? R2D2, you know better than to trust a strange computer!” (C3PO)
I'm sure I'll take heat for this but, honestly, I don't think it's that bad. One boolean is (almost) as good as another. Without seeing the rest of the code, it's hard to tell what the intention was. Certainly I would try not to do this but perhaps the developer was attempting to avoid a global variable to hold control state? Or perhaps there are a number of controls who's state has to be managed and the dev wanted to avoid an array or a hash? Perhaps the control state is set from a disconnected object and there is no mechanism to transfer state? I dunno? But it's pretty common to do things like if $('#myid').hasClass('enabled') { // do something }. Other than string processsing to get a boolean, it doesn't seem that far different to me. shrug.
-
I'm sure I'll take heat for this but, honestly, I don't think it's that bad. One boolean is (almost) as good as another. Without seeing the rest of the code, it's hard to tell what the intention was. Certainly I would try not to do this but perhaps the developer was attempting to avoid a global variable to hold control state? Or perhaps there are a number of controls who's state has to be managed and the dev wanted to avoid an array or a hash? Perhaps the control state is set from a disconnected object and there is no mechanism to transfer state? I dunno? But it's pretty common to do things like if $('#myid').hasClass('enabled') { // do something }. Other than string processsing to get a boolean, it doesn't seem that far different to me. shrug.
Here's the thing though: it's not obvious to some future developer why all of a sudden the control is disabled or enabled. When Alberto finds this, it's still not obvious. If you had something like: if (someBadCondition) { disableControl(); setTextRed(); } [one might abstract more, but you get the idea], then the intention of the developer is exposed. Also, as others have mentioned, it's far too easy to introduce unintentional side-effects: "Oh, you want the red to change to blue? Coming right up..." because new developer doesn't realize that (en)disability of said control is dependent on color (why would it be?). @Alberto: on the plus side, at least your organization got the first part right: you fired the dev.