A couple of entries from the Codex Vomitus
-
Gary Wheeler wrote:
zero-order asshat
That is probably the best quote I've seen in awhile :-D
:bows: Thank you, thank you! I'm here all week. Try the veal, it's to die for!
Software Zen:
delete this; -
:bows: Thank you, thank you! I'm here all week. Try the veal, it's to die for!
Software Zen:
delete this;Gary Wheeler wrote:
Try the veal, it's to die for!
Is it ... veally good? :-D
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined." - Homer
-
Gary Wheeler wrote:
Try the veal, it's to die for!
Is it ... veally good? :-D
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined." - Homer
I think it meats and exceeds people's expectations.
Josh Davis
This is what plays in my head when I finish projects. -
I have seen
#define TRUE (1==1)
Which is kinda OK But in the same code there was
#define TRUE (2+2==4)
#define FALSE (2+2=5)Which just goes to show testing wasn't his strong suit.
Sent from my Amstrad PC 1640 Never throw anything away, Griff Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay... AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
-
This is compiled using the C++ compiler from the Windows SDK. The O(0) moron refused to use Visual Studio. The whole fetid mess is glued together using a make file and a page of command line operations.
Dar Brett wrote:
I think I get boolean and NULL stuff
TRUEandFALSEhave been inwindows.hfor eons, as well as their 'type'BOOL, which O(0) didn't use. He usedint's. The code also assumes in a lot of places thatFALSE == 0andTRUE == 1by using the actual constants rather than the#define's.Dar Brett wrote:
ERROR definition for in Windows - does this break the #error directive
Windows defines
ERRORas 0. It doesn't break#error, which is a compiler directive. It does break understanding return values from certain Windows API functions, mainly GDI. Fortunately this app is more or less a service, and there was no UI involved.Software Zen:
delete this;Quote:
The O(0) moron refused to use Visual Studio.
Sounds similar to a guy at a company that I used to work for. He did use Visual Studio, but he was "too good" to use the debugger, preferring to output values to a file to do testing. He also liked to keep his variable names <= 3 letters long to "save time". X|
Just because the code works, it doesn't mean that it is good code.
-
Quote:
The O(0) moron refused to use Visual Studio.
Sounds similar to a guy at a company that I used to work for. He did use Visual Studio, but he was "too good" to use the debugger, preferring to output values to a file to do testing. He also liked to keep his variable names <= 3 letters long to "save time". X|
Just because the code works, it doesn't mean that it is good code.
BillW33 wrote:
he was "too good" to use the debugger, preferring to output values to a file to do testing
This software includes a 'built-in' debugger, which is basically a home-grown command-line assembler/disassembler. This is for debugging code written mostly in C. The makefile that builds this crap sets compile options to generate assembly language source files to aid in the debugging.
Software Zen:
delete this; -
/***** Stuff that Windows did wrong *****/
#ifdef ERROR
#undef ERROR
#endif
#define ERROR (-1)
#define OK (0)/***** Generic Stuff not in Windows *****/
#ifndef TRUE
#define TRUE 1
#endif
#ifndef FALSE
#define FALSE 0
#endif
#ifndef NULL
#define NULL 0
#endifThis is in a body of 'C' code I'm stuck with maintaining. This crap was originally written by a Sun UNIX jock who was a zero-order asshat.
Software Zen:
delete this; -
Quote:
The O(0) moron refused to use Visual Studio.
Sounds similar to a guy at a company that I used to work for. He did use Visual Studio, but he was "too good" to use the debugger, preferring to output values to a file to do testing. He also liked to keep his variable names <= 3 letters long to "save time". X|
Just because the code works, it doesn't mean that it is good code.
Aww cr@p, I met these kind of "people"... and I'm currently maintaining their "work".
GCS d-- s-/++ a- C++++ U+++ P- L+@ E-- W++ N+ o+ K- w+++ O? M-- V? PS+ PE- Y+ PGP t+ 5? X R+++ tv-- b+(+++) DI+++ D++ G e++ h--- ++>+++ y+++* Weapons extension: ma- k++ F+2 X
-
It looks similar to the code I have to maintain. My gods...
GCS d-- s-/++ a- C++++ U+++ P- L+@ E-- W++ N+ o+ K- w+++ O? M-- V? PS+ PE- Y+ PGP t+ 5? X R+++ tv-- b+(+++) DI+++ D++ G e++ h--- ++>+++ y+++* Weapons extension: ma- k++ F+2 X
You have my most profound sympathies. Maybe we should start our own support group. Oh wait. That's what this forum is... :sigh:
Software Zen:
delete this; -
Yep, I've got over 100 source files chock-full of this kind of stuff. The average identifier length is about 5 characters, and eeeeeverything's global, sports fans! I'd like to kill the mother:elephant:er who wrote it.
Software Zen:
delete this;Maybe you should port it to Excel, since that's obviously what they want.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
-
Maybe you should port it to Excel, since that's obviously what they want.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
Mark_Wallace wrote:
Maybe you should port it to Excel
:laugh: ;P :laugh: ;P :laugh: That's outrageously funny. This software runs a piece of hardware that accepts a proprietary printer command language, renders that into bitmaps, and ships the bitmaps out a set of fiber optic connections to ink-jet print heads. This is on a press where we're printing up to 17 feet of paper per second, full color on both sides. I think this would win the "Best Abuse of Excel Macros" contest hands down.
Software Zen:
delete this;
