I personally use x (and y and z for nested loops - if you nest more than two levels, you need to redesign), I make it unsigned (unless there's a specific reason to use signed) because that more accurately models the real world, and I use the prefix form of the increment operator because it's potentially more efficient. So my canonical form of that construct would be:

for (unsigned x = 0; x < size; ++x)

And yes, some of my co-workers make fun of me. The ones who spend twice as much time debugging their code as I do debugging mine.

Nowadays, any noun can be verbed.

We were using a 2x20 character display, so the "gas gauge" went from 0 to 20 bars.

Actually, that would be a very logical thing to do if the size of the array could change and the requirement was that the last element of the array be set to that particular value. If that's the case, I'd prefer the "1" to be a const int rather than hardcoded. And some comments would also be nice.

Just unearthed the following gem to display a progress bar:

// display the battery gauge and percentage
switch(uiBattBarPosition)
{
case(0):
DisplayMessage(MAC_MSG_PTR(SS_BATTERY_CHARGE),s,"");
break;
case(1):
DisplayMessage(MAC_MSG_PTR(SS_BATTERY_CHARGE),s,"\xff");
break;
case(2):
DisplayMessage(MAC_MSG_PTR(SS_BATTERY_CHARGE),s,"\xff\xff");
break;
case(3):
DisplayMessage(MAC_MSG_PTR(SS_BATTERY_CHARGE),s,"\xff\xff\xff");
break;
case(4):
DisplayMessage(MAC_MSG_PTR(SS_BATTERY_CHARGE),s,"\xff\xff\xff\xff");
break;
case(5):
DisplayMessage(MAC_MSG_PTR(SS_BATTERY_CHARGE),s,"\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff");
break;
case(6):
DisplayMessage(MAC_MSG_PTR(SS_BATTERY_CHARGE),s,"\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff");
break;
case(7):
DisplayMessage(MAC_MSG_PTR(SS_BATTERY_CHARGE),s,"\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff");
break;
case(8):
DisplayMessage(MAC_MSG_PTR(SS_BATTERY_CHARGE),s,"\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff");
break;
case(9):
DisplayMessage(MAC_MSG_PTR(SS_BATTERY_CHARGE),s,"\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff");
break;
case(10):
DisplayMessage(MAC_MSG_PTR(SS_BATTERY_CHARGE),s,"\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff");
break;
case(11):
DisplayMessage(MAC_MSG_PTR(SS_BATTERY_CHARGE),s,"\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff");
break;
case(12):
DisplayMessage(MAC_MSG_PTR(SS_BATTERY_CHARGE),s,"\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff");
break;
case(13):
DisplayMessage(MAC_MSG_PTR(SS_BATTERY_CHARGE),s,"\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff");
break;
case(14):
DisplayMessage(MAC_MSG_PTR(SS_BATTERY_CHARGE),s,"\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff");
break;
case(15):
DisplayMessage(MAC_MSG_PTR(SS_BATTERY_CHARGE),s,"\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff");
break;
case(16):
DisplayMessage(MAC_MSG_PTR(SS_BATTERY_CHARGE),s,"\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff");
break;
case(17):
DisplayMessage(MAC_MSG_PTR(SS_BATTERY_CHARGE),s,"\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff");
break;
case(18):
DisplayMessage(MAC_MSG_PTR(SS_BATTERY_CHARGE),s,"\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff");
break;
case(19):
DisplayMessage(MAC_MSG_PTR(SS_BATTERY_CH

I don't so much mind putting an icon on my desktop (although most installers will ask whether or not to do this), but I had one app that not only automatically updates itself, but rearranges all of my desktop icons when it does so. I keep my icons organized on the right side of my desktop, specifically so that I can tell if something has added one without my permission (it'll always be in the upper left corner). This app comes in and moves them all to the upper left corner and down the left side, and gets them all out of order to boot. I have stopped using that app. And yes, I could have turned off automatic updates, but it still rearranged the icons even when I did a manual update.

A better question is, why are grammar so difficult?

Just ran across this in code I've been asked to maintain (no kidding):

if (((ucGlobalHeaterEnable & (1 << UC_BHOSE_HTR_ON) ) > 0) ? 1 : 0)
{
...
}

Unbelievable!

Recently my group was asked to troubleshoot an embedded program written by our overseas sister company, which was "never coming up" and their engineers(?) couldn't figure out why. A few seconds of perusing revealed the following in the middle of the program's initialization code:

for (long i = 0; i < 99999L; i++) dlytsk(cur_task, DLY_SECS, 9999);

The dlytsk function causes the calling task to sleep for the specified number of seconds. So the effect of this snippet was to sleep for around 32 years before allowing initialization to complete. One has to wonder what the original intent was (both of the programmer and the manager who hired him!).