Comment On Colored Logic

bigr:

That code looks awfully familiar...

I swear some people are writing code on acid.  I'd love to be there when someone wants to change the color scheme.

[manager] We've been asked to update the color scheme to fit the corporae standard.  I've got the intern on it.

[developer] Wait, the logic depends on the RGB values of the components.

[manager] What?  Why?!

Now here's the game, kind of like madlibs:  What's the developers response?  I'd get it going but I can't even think of a reason.  I need to eat.

Mung Kee:

What's wrong with a business logic color coding scheme?  If it's
good enough for the Dept. of Homeland Security....er....I
mean......nevermind. 

Anonymous:

This isn't a WTF: it's obvious that the
programmer was working in a low memory environment so he reused the
members of the UI classes as state variables rather than bloating
memory with some of his own. Commendable!

loneprogrammer:

So the problem here is using magic numbers, right?

The concern is that there is a set amount of magic numbers (256 * 256 * 256).  It is just a matter of time before all possibilities are used up.  The developer then will have to use window position or frame size for additional options.  Appears to have painted himself in a corner on this one.

Anonymous:

This isn't a WTF: it's obvious that the programmer was working in a low memory environment so he reused the members of the UI classes as state variables rather than bloating memory with some of his own. Commendable!

Yes, this is obvious.  Obviously bullshit.

John Smallberries:

what's a "floppy"?

Mike R:

Anonymous:

This isn't a WTF: it's obvious that the programmer was working in a low memory environment so he reused the members of the UI classes as state variables rather than bloating memory with some of his own. Commendable!

There's just one flaw with that: It's VB!!!! the only programming language I know of that requres four floppies of runtime for a simple measly "Hello World" app.

Really?  Then you really aren't all that perceptive.  Runtime files (usually known as Dynamic Link Libraries...you know dll files?) have been around for ages.  Most OS interpretations of C++ required a few core DLLs to function.  The only reason you didn't need to distribute them is that they included them with the OS usually.  Do you think Pearl runs without a runtime?  Java?  Have you TRIED to run java without the JVM?  How about Python? 

Is there some magic I'm unaware of that I've been missing for all these years? 

Hell, the only reason that VB had P-Code to start with was because it was actually once considered ADVANTAGEOUS.  Moore's Law hadn't really taken off in the business world yet and p-code with a runtime takes less space than a compiled app on a harddrive.  Now that's a moot point, but then it was big.

Now, I'm not saying VB is a stellar language, but if you are going to make a blanket statement, please don't make one that obviously makes you look like a complete and total idiot.

Do they even teach these kids anything in school these days?  Yeesh.

Mike R:

Anonymous:

This isn't a WTF: it's obvious that the programmer was working in a low memory environment so he reused the members of the UI classes as state variables rather than bloating memory with some of his own. Commendable!

There's just one flaw with that: It's VB!!!! the only programming language I know of that requres four floppies of runtime for a simple measly "Hello World" app.

Actually it's Fox Pro,  and the quilty party was long gone before I got here.

Alex Papadimoulis:

MsgBox "There was an error creating the client. " & _
       "Please ensure all required fields were entered."

dubwai:

I swear some people are writing code on acid.  I'd love to be there when someone wants to change the color scheme.

[manager] We've been asked to update the color scheme to fit the corporae standard.  I've got the intern on it.

[developer] Wait, the logic depends on the RGB values of the components.

[manager] What?  Why?!

Now here's the game, kind of like madlibs:  What's the developers response?  I'd get it going but I can't even think of a reason.  I need to eat.

[developer]  Because that's what marketing put in the requirements!
or
[Paula]  I'm Brillant!

Anonymous:

Actually it's Fox Pro,  and the quilty party was long gone before I got here.

Hmmm.  I wouldn't describe this as quilty.  More of a highly-flammable, fuzzy, poly-blend blanket.

John Smallberries:

Alex Papadimoulis:

MsgBox "There was an error creating the client. " & _
       "Please ensure all required fields were entered."

Yeah, don't validate the input or anything...wait for it fail, then change the control color.

Anonymous:

This isn't a WTF: it's obvious that the programmer was working in a low memory environment so he reused the members of the UI classes as state variables rather than bloating memory with some of his own. Commendable!

What's really sad about this is that this is exactly the kind of thinking that many developers use when trying to minimize memory footprints.  Yeah, get rid of that one byte.  That's going to really make a huge difference in a GUI application. Ignore all the real memory usage problems.  Totally commendable, for sure.

dubwai:

Anonymous:

This isn't a WTF: it's obvious that the programmer was working in a low memory environment so he reused the members of the UI classes as state variables rather than bloating memory with some of his own. Commendable!

What's really sad about this is that this is exactly the kind of thinking that many developers use when trying to minimize memory footprints.  Yeah, get rid of that one byte.  That's going to really make a huge difference in a GUI application. Ignore all the real memory usage problems.  Totally commendable, for sure.

This coder did not have any memory considerations when creating this.

ammoQ:

My guess: everything was so tightly seperated that the coder found no other way to determine whether or not the operation was successfull without changing that other, probably not-at-all better code.

I think it's pretty obvious that this code's problem it has no model.  The internal state and the view of it are completely coupled in unholy matrimony.  I've dealt with this kind of 'design' before and it's a nightmare to maintain.  Change the text of a selection and about dozen bugs appear.

Anonymous:

dubwai:

Anonymous:

This isn't a WTF: it's obvious that the programmer was working in a low memory environment so he reused the members of the UI classes as state variables rather than bloating memory with some of his own. Commendable!

What's really sad about this is that this is exactly the kind of thinking that many developers use when trying to minimize memory footprints.  Yeah, get rid of that one byte.  That's going to really make a huge difference in a GUI application. Ignore all the real memory usage problems.  Totally commendable, for sure.

This coder did not have any memory considerations when creating this.

I didn't think so. I was more directing that at the person who thought this was 'clearly' for memory savings.

scheky:

Mike R:

Anonymous:

This isn't a WTF: it's obvious that the programmer was
working in a low memory environment so he reused the members of the UI
classes as state variables rather than bloating memory with some of his
own. Commendable!

There's just one flaw with that: It's VB!!!! the only programming language I know of that requres four floppies of runtime for a simple measly "Hello World" app.

Really?  Then you really aren't all that perceptive. 
Runtime files (usually known as Dynamic Link Libraries...you know dll
files?) have been around for ages.  Most OS interpretations of C++
required a few core DLLs to function.  The only reason you didn't
need to distribute them is that they included them with the OS
usually.  Do you think Pearl runs without a runtime? 
Java?  Have you TRIED to run java without the JVM?  How about
Python? 

Of course, I'd say Java was piggish, as well. And Yes, I realise a
windows app won't run without windows. But when a windows app won't run
without the 4-5MB of extra garbage tacked along with it, there's
something wrong. Anyway, its been established that its FoxPro, so this
argument is moot.

Is there some magic I'm unaware of that I've been missing for all these years?

I could go into how DOS COM files fit into 64k, needed next to
nothing and could be written to not only not rely on the OS, but also
no rely on the system or video ROMs. But, that would be pointless.

Hell, the only reason that VB had P-Code to start with was because
it was actually once considered ADVANTAGEOUS.  Moore's Law hadn't
really taken off in the business world yet and p-code with a runtime
takes less space than a compiled app on a harddrive.  Now that's a
moot point, but then it was big.

Can you please tell me the advantage to this? There is only ONE
advantage I can think of and it surely wasn't about to pan out in VB,
and that would be one of portability.

Now, I'm not saying VB is a stellar language, but if you are going
to make a blanket statement, please don't make one that obviously makes
you look like a complete and total idiot.

I'm not the only one to do that, believe me.

Do they even teach these kids anything in school these days?  Yeesh.

You're likely younger than I am. So, do they?

Mike R:

scheky:

Mike R:

Anonymous:

This isn't a WTF: it's obvious that the programmer was
working in a low memory environment so he reused the members of the UI
classes as state variables rather than bloating memory with some of his
own. Commendable!

There's just one flaw with that: It's VB!!!! the only programming language I know of that requres four floppies of runtime for a simple measly "Hello World" app.

Really?  Then you really aren't all that perceptive. 
Runtime files (usually known as Dynamic Link Libraries...you know dll
files?) have been around for ages.  Most OS interpretations of C++
required a few core DLLs to function.  The only reason you didn't
need to distribute them is that they included them with the OS
usually.  Do you think Pearl runs without a runtime? 
Java?  Have you TRIED to run java without the JVM?  How about
Python? 

Of course, I'd say Java was piggish, as well. And Yes, I realise a
windows app won't run without windows. But when a windows app won't run
without the 4-5MB of extra garbage tacked along with it, there's
something wrong. Anyway, its been established that its FoxPro, so this
argument is moot.

Is there some magic I'm unaware of that I've been missing for all these years?

I could go into how DOS COM files fit into 64k, needed next to
nothing and could be written to not only not rely on the OS, but also
no rely on the system or video ROMs. But, that would be pointless.

Hell, the only reason that VB had P-Code to start with was because
it was actually once considered ADVANTAGEOUS.  Moore's Law hadn't
really taken off in the business world yet and p-code with a runtime
takes less space than a compiled app on a harddrive.  Now that's a
moot point, but then it was big.

Can you please tell me the advantage to this? There is only ONE
advantage I can think of and it surely wasn't about to pan out in VB,
and that would be one of portability.

Now, I'm not saying VB is a stellar language, but if you are going
to make a blanket statement, please don't make one that obviously makes
you look like a complete and total idiot.

I'm not the only one to do that, believe me.

Do they even teach these kids anything in school these days?  Yeesh.

You're likely younger than I am. So, do they?

dubwai:

ammoQ:

My guess: everything was so
tightly seperated that the coder found no other way to determine
whether or not the operation was successfull without changing that
other, probably not-at-all better code.

I think it's pretty obvious that this code's problem it has no
model.  The internal state and the view of it are completely
coupled in unholy matrimony.  I've dealt with this kind of
'design' before and it's a nightmare to maintain.  Change the text
of a selection and about dozen bugs appear.

El Duderino:

dubwai:

I swear some people are writing code on acid.  I'd love to be there when someone wants to change the color scheme.

[manager] We've been asked to update the color scheme to fit the corporae standard.  I've got the intern on it.

[developer] Wait, the logic depends on the RGB values of the components.

[manager] What?  Why?!

Now here's the game, kind of like madlibs:  What's the
developers response?  I'd get it going but I can't even think of a
reason.  I need to eat.

[developer]  Because that's what marketing put in the requirements!
or
[Paula]  I'm Brillant!

Anonymous:

I get it - the WTF is that the colors don't match.  And that everything is primary colors, which would make your eyes hurt after a while...

--Daniel T

Indeed.  I would have preferred a nice Mauve.  Or Taupe.  Lavender would also be quite soothing. 

ammoQ:

dubwai:

ammoQ:

My guess: everything was so tightly seperated that the coder found no other way to determine whether or not the operation was successfull without changing that other, probably not-at-all better code.

I think it's pretty obvious that this code's problem it has no model.  The internal state and the view of it are completely coupled in unholy matrimony.  I've dealt with this kind of 'design' before and it's a nightmare to maintain.  Change the text of a selection and about dozen bugs appear.

We all know, sometimes a well-meaning SW designer hides just too much of the (supposedly) internal state of a module, so other modules have to rely on side effects to find out what's actually going on. Of course the right way to solve that would be to change the model, but there may be other constraints (like: no time left) that make it difficult to do so; the coder of this WTF obviously thought that relying on the color is less problematic (less likely to change) than relying on the text of the label.

Generally, it's difficult for a view to render something that the model is hiding unless your model is a Holub-esque 'render yourself' model.  So I'm wagering that there is no internal model.  The business code is embedded in the controls.  There is no state other than that of the gui components.  I've seen it too many times to count.

As pointed out previously the obvious problem is that some silly manager might want to change the color of the error dialog to better match the new clock behind his desk.  So obviously the best solution would be make all the colors involved configuration settings that way the maintainer can change the color of the dialogs and the color senstivity of these brillant programmic responses at the same time with out destroying the program logic.  Something on the lines of :

    If lblClientNum.ForeColor = wftPendingColor Then
        MsgBox "Client was created but is pending activation."
    ElseIf lblClientNum.ForeColor = wtfItWorkedColor Then
        MsgBox "Client was created and was successfully activated."
    ElseIf lblClientNum.ForeColor = wtfTotalScrewUpColor _
            And lblClientNum.Caption = "999999" Then
        MsgBox "There was an error creating the client. " & _
               "Please ensure all required fields were entered."
    End If

Anonymous:

Anonymous:

I get it - the WTF is that the colors don't match.  And that everything is primary colors, which would make your eyes hurt after a while...

--Daniel T

 

Indeed.  I would have preferred a nice Mauve.  Or Taupe.  Lavender would also be quite soothing. 

That's probably how this was discovered.  The colors were deemed offensive but when changed, the code stopped working.

Aargh! *User*, not *use*!

Stupid EBKAC.

ammoQ:

dubwai:

ammoQ:

My guess: everything was so
tightly seperated that the coder found no other way to determine
whether or not the operation was successfull without changing that
other, probably not-at-all better code.

I think it's pretty obvious that this code's problem it has no
model.  The internal state and the view of it are completely
coupled in unholy matrimony.  I've dealt with this kind of
'design' before and it's a nightmare to maintain.  Change the text
of a selection and about dozen bugs appear.

We all know, sometimes a well-meaning SW designer hides just too much
of the (supposedly) internal state of a module, so other modules have
to rely on side effects to find out what's actually going on. Of course
the right way to solve that would be to change the model, but there may
be other constraints (like: no time left) that make it difficult to do
so; the coder of this WTF obviously thought that relying on the color
is less problematic (less likely to change) than relying on the text of
the label.

Call SaveNewClientData

to
result =  SaveNewClientData()

would go a long way.

Anonymous:

I get it - the WTF is that the colors don't match.  And that
everything is primary colors, which would make your eyes hurt after a
while...



--Daniel T

Anonymous:

ElseIf lblClientNum.ForeColor = wtfTotalScrewUpColor _

Finally, a sensible use for Hungarian notation. [:D]

Ayende Rahien:

This is about as scary a code as I've seen.
I would really like to hear the justification for this one.

There is none.

John Smallberries:

ammoQ:

We all know, sometimes a well-meaning SW designer hides just too much
of the (supposedly) internal state of a module, so other modules have
to rely on side effects to find out what's actually going on. Of course
the right way to solve that would be to change the model, but there may
be other constraints (like: no time left) that make it difficult to do
so; the coder of this WTF obviously thought that relying on the color
is less problematic (less likely to change) than relying on the text of
the label.

Nice try, but you just can't justify this level of WTFery.

Simply changing

Call SaveNewClientData

to
result =  SaveNewClientData()

would go a long way

dubwai:

Generally, it's difficult for a view to render something that the
model is hiding unless your model is a Holub-esque 'render yourself'
model.  So I'm wagering that there is no internal model.  The business
code is embedded in the controls.  There is no state other than that of
the gui components.  I've seen it too many times to count.

Ayende Rahien:

This is about as scary a code as I've seen.

I would really like to hear the justification for this one.

dubwai:

I swear some people are writing code on acid.  I'd love to be there when someone wants to change the color scheme.

[manager] We've been asked to update the color scheme to fit the corporae standard.  I've got the intern on it.

[developer] Wait, the logic depends on the RGB values of the components.

[manager] What?  Why?!

Now here's the game, kind of like madlibs:  What's the developers response?  I'd get it going but I can't even think of a reason.  I need to eat.

Ita erat quando hic adveni    (It was that way when I got here...)