Copy and Paste should be banned from a code editor
-
This code (sanitized):
static public void PostSomeCodeMethod(string v1, string v2, string v3)
{
string xmldata = iRecord.CreateField("apicode", APICodes.SomeCode.ToString());
xmldata += iRecord.CreateField("f1", const1);
xmldata += iRecord.CreateField("f2", const2);
xmldata += iRecord.CreateField("f3", v1);
xmldata += iRecord.CreateField("f4", v2);
xmldata += iRecord.CreateField("f5", v3);ErrorMessage = null; CallPostAPI(xmldata);Is duplicated a dozen times. The only difference? The method name and the APICodes enumeration. I swear, copy and paste should be banned, and there must be something we can put into the water that prevents programmers like this from ever writing another line of code. (Not to mention the horrific way the XML data is created. Happy belated Halloween, everyone.) Marc
Imperative to Functional Programming Succinctly Higher Order Programming
-
This code (sanitized):
static public void PostSomeCodeMethod(string v1, string v2, string v3)
{
string xmldata = iRecord.CreateField("apicode", APICodes.SomeCode.ToString());
xmldata += iRecord.CreateField("f1", const1);
xmldata += iRecord.CreateField("f2", const2);
xmldata += iRecord.CreateField("f3", v1);
xmldata += iRecord.CreateField("f4", v2);
xmldata += iRecord.CreateField("f5", v3);ErrorMessage = null; CallPostAPI(xmldata);Is duplicated a dozen times. The only difference? The method name and the APICodes enumeration. I swear, copy and paste should be banned, and there must be something we can put into the water that prevents programmers like this from ever writing another line of code. (Not to mention the horrific way the XML data is created. Happy belated Halloween, everyone.) Marc
Imperative to Functional Programming Succinctly Higher Order Programming
-
-
Marc Clifton wrote:
there must be something we can put into the water
There is. Code reviews. :) /ravi
My new year resolution: 2048 x 1536 Home | Articles | My .NET bits | Freeware ravib(at)ravib(dot)com
Ravi Bhavnani wrote:
There is. Code reviews.
How do you figure out that the guy you hired is creating crap, especially if you're a small outfit and you only have one dev, and it's this guy? Do you hire another consultant to do the code reviews? BTW, here's is bio: With degrees in Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, Mr. ... has been programming and designing computer applications for over 20 years. The last five years have been spent on developing mobile apps for iPhone, iPad, Android and Windows Phone and Windows 8 environments. Mr. ... skills also include being a MS SQL Server DBA as well as a web developer.. Now that's scary. Marc
Imperative to Functional Programming Succinctly Higher Order Programming
-
This code (sanitized):
static public void PostSomeCodeMethod(string v1, string v2, string v3)
{
string xmldata = iRecord.CreateField("apicode", APICodes.SomeCode.ToString());
xmldata += iRecord.CreateField("f1", const1);
xmldata += iRecord.CreateField("f2", const2);
xmldata += iRecord.CreateField("f3", v1);
xmldata += iRecord.CreateField("f4", v2);
xmldata += iRecord.CreateField("f5", v3);ErrorMessage = null; CallPostAPI(xmldata);Is duplicated a dozen times. The only difference? The method name and the APICodes enumeration. I swear, copy and paste should be banned, and there must be something we can put into the water that prevents programmers like this from ever writing another line of code. (Not to mention the horrific way the XML data is created. Happy belated Halloween, everyone.) Marc
Imperative to Functional Programming Succinctly Higher Order Programming
I disagree. Copy-paste makes for highly-efficient coding. Not only do you get a perfect duplicate of a line, but the efficiency increases exponentially with the number of copies! Think about it... First you copy-paste one line, then you copy-paste those two lines, then four... You could be copying thousands of lines after only a dozen pastes! And think about it... Unlike all of those silly objects and functions, you can change just one of those thousand copies without having to mess with all of the rest! It's so much better that way. So everyone needs to copy-paste more....copy-paste more....copy-paste more....copy-paste more....copy-paste more....copy-paste more....copy-paste more....copy-paste more....copy-paste more....copy-paste more....copy-paste more....copy-paste more....copy-paste more....copy-paste more....copy-paste more.... (Chris needs to add a <sarcasm> tag to the forums, cause I know someone is going to take the above literally... Well, not now, because they'll read this message... Unless it's too small... Here, let me make it smaller.....)
Proud to have finally moved to the A-Ark. Which one are you in?
Author of the Guardians Saga (Sci-Fi/Fantasy novels) -
I disagree. Copy-paste makes for highly-efficient coding. Not only do you get a perfect duplicate of a line, but the efficiency increases exponentially with the number of copies! Think about it... First you copy-paste one line, then you copy-paste those two lines, then four... You could be copying thousands of lines after only a dozen pastes! And think about it... Unlike all of those silly objects and functions, you can change just one of those thousand copies without having to mess with all of the rest! It's so much better that way. So everyone needs to copy-paste more....copy-paste more....copy-paste more....copy-paste more....copy-paste more....copy-paste more....copy-paste more....copy-paste more....copy-paste more....copy-paste more....copy-paste more....copy-paste more....copy-paste more....copy-paste more....copy-paste more.... (Chris needs to add a <sarcasm> tag to the forums, cause I know someone is going to take the above literally... Well, not now, because they'll read this message... Unless it's too small... Here, let me make it smaller.....)
Proud to have finally moved to the A-Ark. Which one are you in?
Author of the Guardians Saga (Sci-Fi/Fantasy novels)Ian Shlasko wrote:
you can change just one of those thousand copies without having to mess with all of the rest! It's so much better that way.
Or use it's evil twin, search and replace to easily change everything everywhere with the click of a mouse button! You've changed my thinking, Ian! I shall strive to become a copy-paste-replace developer! Marc
Imperative to Functional Programming Succinctly Higher Order Programming
-
This code (sanitized):
static public void PostSomeCodeMethod(string v1, string v2, string v3)
{
string xmldata = iRecord.CreateField("apicode", APICodes.SomeCode.ToString());
xmldata += iRecord.CreateField("f1", const1);
xmldata += iRecord.CreateField("f2", const2);
xmldata += iRecord.CreateField("f3", v1);
xmldata += iRecord.CreateField("f4", v2);
xmldata += iRecord.CreateField("f5", v3);ErrorMessage = null; CallPostAPI(xmldata);Is duplicated a dozen times. The only difference? The method name and the APICodes enumeration. I swear, copy and paste should be banned, and there must be something we can put into the water that prevents programmers like this from ever writing another line of code. (Not to mention the horrific way the XML data is created. Happy belated Halloween, everyone.) Marc
Imperative to Functional Programming Succinctly Higher Order Programming
Copy is OK; it's paste that causes the trouble.
-
Ravi Bhavnani wrote:
There is. Code reviews.
How do you figure out that the guy you hired is creating crap, especially if you're a small outfit and you only have one dev, and it's this guy? Do you hire another consultant to do the code reviews? BTW, here's is bio: With degrees in Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, Mr. ... has been programming and designing computer applications for over 20 years. The last five years have been spent on developing mobile apps for iPhone, iPad, Android and Windows Phone and Windows 8 environments. Mr. ... skills also include being a MS SQL Server DBA as well as a web developer.. Now that's scary. Marc
Imperative to Functional Programming Succinctly Higher Order Programming
Marc Clifton wrote:
How do you figure out that the guy you hired is creating crap,
I don't see any way other than formal/informal code inspections. The sooner they're done, the easier they are to fix. Eyeballing check-ins at the end of the day may be a valuable yet lightweight approach. If there's no cause for alarm, further reviews may be unnecessary, or at least not frequently required. You don't want to find yourself in a situation (as I expect you may be in) where several weeks of check-ins are of poor quality. :( /ravi
My new year resolution: 2048 x 1536 Home | Articles | My .NET bits | Freeware ravib(at)ravib(dot)com
-
Ravi Bhavnani wrote:
There is. Code reviews.
How do you figure out that the guy you hired is creating crap, especially if you're a small outfit and you only have one dev, and it's this guy? Do you hire another consultant to do the code reviews? BTW, here's is bio: With degrees in Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, Mr. ... has been programming and designing computer applications for over 20 years. The last five years have been spent on developing mobile apps for iPhone, iPad, Android and Windows Phone and Windows 8 environments. Mr. ... skills also include being a MS SQL Server DBA as well as a web developer.. Now that's scary. Marc
Imperative to Functional Programming Succinctly Higher Order Programming
Marc Clifton wrote:
With degrees in Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, Mr. ... has been programming and designing computer applications for over 20 years
That's like saying "with qualifications in refrigerator and microwave oven design, Mr. ... has been creating recipes for over 20 years". The qualifications have little to do with the work he's doing.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
-
This code (sanitized):
static public void PostSomeCodeMethod(string v1, string v2, string v3)
{
string xmldata = iRecord.CreateField("apicode", APICodes.SomeCode.ToString());
xmldata += iRecord.CreateField("f1", const1);
xmldata += iRecord.CreateField("f2", const2);
xmldata += iRecord.CreateField("f3", v1);
xmldata += iRecord.CreateField("f4", v2);
xmldata += iRecord.CreateField("f5", v3);ErrorMessage = null; CallPostAPI(xmldata);Is duplicated a dozen times. The only difference? The method name and the APICodes enumeration. I swear, copy and paste should be banned, and there must be something we can put into the water that prevents programmers like this from ever writing another line of code. (Not to mention the horrific way the XML data is created. Happy belated Halloween, everyone.) Marc
Imperative to Functional Programming Succinctly Higher Order Programming
If he was being paid by number of lines of code, I congratulate him. I'd probably do the same.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
-
This code (sanitized):
static public void PostSomeCodeMethod(string v1, string v2, string v3)
{
string xmldata = iRecord.CreateField("apicode", APICodes.SomeCode.ToString());
xmldata += iRecord.CreateField("f1", const1);
xmldata += iRecord.CreateField("f2", const2);
xmldata += iRecord.CreateField("f3", v1);
xmldata += iRecord.CreateField("f4", v2);
xmldata += iRecord.CreateField("f5", v3);ErrorMessage = null; CallPostAPI(xmldata);Is duplicated a dozen times. The only difference? The method name and the APICodes enumeration. I swear, copy and paste should be banned, and there must be something we can put into the water that prevents programmers like this from ever writing another line of code. (Not to mention the horrific way the XML data is created. Happy belated Halloween, everyone.) Marc
Imperative to Functional Programming Succinctly Higher Order Programming
C&P is so called static modelling, where programmer runs the program (not the computer), evaluate the exit and then write exactly what he done in his head in code, so computer can repeat it. Ironic thing is that computer is made for automation and actually it is his job to do the repetitive stuff while human neural network (called brain) is very good in finding and giving short description of repetitive stuffs. So apparently some brains are better than others.
-
Marc Clifton wrote:
there must be something we can put into the water
There is. Code reviews. :) /ravi
My new year resolution: 2048 x 1536 Home | Articles | My .NET bits | Freeware ravib(at)ravib(dot)com
Ravi Bhavnani wrote:
Marc Clifton wrote:
there must be something we can put into the water
There is. Code reviews.
Well, we could put the offending developer into the water ... head-first. That would solve the issue.
The good thing about pessimism is, that you are always either right or pleasently surprised.
