The Daily WTF: Curious Perversions in Information Technology

2013-02-28 Reply Admin

for(;;) {

echo "Am I frist?";

}

2013-02-28 Reply Admin

Haven't the last two come up before? I feel like the last one especially was almost word-for-word posted some time ago ($cat instead of $category).

2013-02-28 Reply Admin

if (dncrptList.Contains(destName))
{
   dId = SymmetricMethod.Decrypto(id);
}
else
{
   dId = SymmetricMethod.Decrypto(id);
}

isn't a WTF. It happens when the logic changes frequently. Rather than merge the two branches and then try to remember what the condition was when the logic requests diverging pathways, you simply leave an if statement stub that you can expect later.

Coding to specification is like walking on water. It's easier when it's frozen.

2013-02-28 Reply Admin

for (;;) {

I think there's a new emoticon in there somewhere for that sick feeling you get when the fog of code smell lifts to reveal an actual rotting corpse.

2013-02-28 Reply Admin

Adam, the most important thing about an if statement is to get the braces on separate lines. I think your cow orker has learned that lesson admirably.

portablejim · 2013-02-28 Reply Admin

The first snippet would be fixed by using

while(true)

instead of

for(;;)

and properly closing the input tag.

Addendum (2013-02-28 08:09): Also, the name fits the dog better.

2013-02-28 Reply Admin

Anom:

for(;;) {
10:
   echo "Am I frist?";
   goto 10;
}

FTFY.

bkDJ · 2013-02-28 Reply Admin

portablejim:
The first snippet would be fixed by using
while(true)
instead of
for(;;)
and properly closing the input tag.

Thank goodness the break tag was properly closed.

2013-02-28 Reply Admin

Or, y'know, you could let version control do its job and not leave redundant code all over the place.

2013-02-28 Reply Admin

Frank:
for (;;) {
I think there's a new emoticon in there somewhere for that sick feeling you get when the fog of code smell lifts to reveal an actual rotting corpse.

Sometimes the code wins

foo:

Anom:

for(;;) {
10:
   echo "Am I frist?";
   goto 10;
}

FTFY.

The more ancient segments of the code base at work are littered with things like:

while (foo) {
  if (bad_condition) goto 99
  *snip*
  99:
  continue
}

Of course, the language it's written in doesn't actually support while loops (well, not as while loops). Or curly braces.

Occasionally, you'll even see:

10:
if (loop_condition) {
  *snip*
  goto 10
}

We obviously kill these things on sight.

2013-02-28 Reply Admin

This is not a WTF!

Long time ago, before the while loop existed, this was the available loop with scope.

for(;;) { // do stuff if (something) break; }

2013-02-28 Reply Admin

Someo I work with managed to figure out how to use reflection in Java to do a for loop.

2013-02-28 Reply Admin

Reminds me of code my former boss wrote (in PL/SQL):

for rec in cur loop <<lbl>> if (condition) goto lbl; ... end;

And then she complained that the database was too slow.

2013-02-28 Reply Admin

Frank:
for (;;) {
I think there's a new emoticon in there somewhere for that sick feeling you get when the fog of code smell lifts to reveal an actual rotting corpse.

New emoticon? Why not Zoidberg?

(;;) {

dgvid · 2013-02-28 Reply Admin

Not a well-respected or especially feared super-villain, though. Pretty much limited to arching Encrypto and nobody knows what the hell that guy's talking about anyway.

(And how much do you love "Venture Brothers" for giving us this use of the word arching?)

2013-02-28 Reply Admin

VS:
This is not a WTF!
Long time ago, before the while loop existed, this was the available loop with scope.

for(;;) { // do stuff if (something) break; }

Er, except, that's not what he's doing. Rather than putting the increment and terminating conditions of a counter in the for statement, he put it in the body, as if he was trying to implement a for loop in a while statement.

But, obviously you knew something so incredibly basic, and I'm obviously getting trolled. That's the preferable reality here.

2013-02-28 Reply Admin

Eve:
Adam, the most important thing about an if statement is to get the braces on separate lines.

Heresy! True programmers only use single-line, braceless block constructs. Preferably heavily nested:

if ( foo )
   while ( vmixingCase_Styles )
      if ( some || any )
      for ( blargh in blargher )
         if ( !blargh )
            thisVar = "1"
            if ( thisVar == "1" )
               doGoValidate_Blargh( blargh )

This example serves to clearly demonstrate the superiority of braceless block constructs. (To our great regret, the !blargh block was unable to utilize this superior technique appropriately. Perhaps the programmer was unfamiliar with the "if ( thisVar = "1" && thisVar == "1" )" pattern. Alas.) It also demonstrates many excellent ways to irritate your co-workers - 3-space indenting (which is one of my favorites), indented braces, braces indented a different amount than the standard indent, nested code blocks which aren't indented, non-nested code blocks which are indented, "unit testing" your language of choice by assigning variables then testing the assignment, pseudo-Hungarian notation use of "v" prefixes (to indicate "variable"? We also use "z" to prefix form elements :/). Sadly, while I didn't lift the actual example from our code base, it definitely originates there in spirit - each of the styles in that block is well represented in the code I have the pleasure of maintaining every day.

ObiWayneKenobi · 2013-02-28 Reply Admin

Steve:
Or, y'know, you could let version control do its job and not leave redundant code all over the place.

This. There is NO excuse beyond laziness or ignorance for having redundant code like that or, worse, having commented out code blocks "just in case" or // Ticket #42: Fixed frobulation of hobnobs to correctly grouse the hobnob -jsmith type of comments.

2013-02-28 Reply Admin

Who doesn't love using Exceptions to govern program flow?

I did this on one of my first professional projects. It started as try{ some stuff } catch(MyException ex){ some other stuff } catch(Exception ex){ a real error }

Not sure why I decided to do this, but it turned into about 10 different catch statements. I thought it was a fun way to do things. That software is gone now, so good riddance.

2013-02-28 Reply Admin

ObiWayneKenobi:
Steve:
Or, y'know, you could let version control do its job and not leave redundant code all over the place.
This. There is NO excuse beyond laziness or ignorance for having redundant code like that or, worse, having commented out code blocks "just in case" or // Ticket #42: Fixed frobulation of hobnobs to correctly grouse the hobnob -jsmith type of comments.

I comment out code all the time. It's usually because I'll want to use parts of it during the rewrite of the function, but I'm not sure what yet. I usually delete it after I'm done. Sometimes I forget.

Nagesh · 2013-02-28 Reply Admin

Honnza:
if (dncrptList.Contains(destName))
{
   dId = SymmetricMethod.Decrypto(id);
}
else
{
   dId = SymmetricMethod.Decrypto(id);
}
isn't a WTF. It happens when the logic changes frequently. Rather than merge the two branches and then try to remember what the condition was when the logic requests diverging pathways, you simply leave an if statement stub that you can expect later.

Coding to specification is like walking on water. It's easier when it's frozen.

Agreed. We have similar situations in our coding.

2013-02-28 Reply Admin

Drake:
Frank:
for (;;) {
I think there's a new emoticon in there somewhere for that sick feeling you get when the fog of code smell lifts to reveal an actual rotting corpse.

New emoticon? Why not Zoidberg?

(;;) {

I actually giggled. Featured comment?

2013-02-28 Reply Admin

Gibbon:
Drake:
Frank:
for (;;) {
I think there's a new emoticon in there somewhere for that sick feeling you get when the fog of code smell lifts to reveal an actual rotting corpse.

New emoticon? Why not Zoidberg?

(;;) {

I actually giggled. Featured comment?

Real programmers do not giggle.

Nagesh · 2013-02-28 Reply Admin

They do LOL instead.

2013-02-28 Reply Admin

Nagesh:
They do LOL instead.

Precisely. Perheps "heh" or even even "hehe". But not "lolol" (you're laughing out loud out loud? or is it laughing out laughing out loud?). Certainly never "lulz" or "lawlz".

2013-02-28 Reply Admin

(/)(;,,;)(/)

2013-02-28 Reply Admin

Anonymous Paranoiac:
even even

We need an 'edit' feature.

2013-02-28 Reply Admin

The link in the title is bad, it's relative and prompted me to download a-simple-misunderstanding.aspx

2013-02-28 Reply Admin

The first and last samples are just weird. I suspect the original programmers were just a bit... ...loopy.

2013-02-28 Reply Admin

ObiWayneKenobi:
Steve:
Or, y'know, you could let version control do its job and not leave redundant code all over the place.
This. There is NO excuse beyond laziness or ignorance for having redundant code like that or, worse, having commented out code blocks "just in case" or // Ticket #42: Fixed frobulation of hobnobs to correctly grouse the hobnob -jsmith type of comments.

At my last job our rationale for doing this crap was a combination of "we've always done it this way" and "only managers have write access to the code repository."

I'll let that second point sink in for a bit.

2013-02-28 Reply Admin

Anonymous Paranoiac:
Nagesh:
They do LOL instead.

Precisely. Perheps "heh" or even even "hehe". But not "lolol" (you're laughing out loud out loud? or is it laughing out laughing out loud?).

It's lolling out loud, d'oh.

2013-02-28 Reply Admin

Sarten X:
The first and last samples are just weird. I suspect the original programmers were just a bit... ...loopy.

YEAHHHHH!!!

2013-02-28 Reply Admin

Anon:
The link in the title is bad, and it should feel bad

FTFY

Matt Westwood · 2013-02-28 Reply Admin

Crabs:
ObiWayneKenobi:
Steve:
Or, y'know, you could let version control do its job and not leave redundant code all over the place.
This. There is NO excuse beyond laziness or ignorance for having redundant code like that or, worse, having commented out code blocks "just in case" or // Ticket #42: Fixed frobulation of hobnobs to correctly grouse the hobnob -jsmith type of comments.

I comment out code all the time. It's usually because I'll want to use parts of it during the rewrite of the function, but I'm not sure what yet. I usually delete it after I'm done. Sometimes I forget.

Oh fuck off! What's wrong with // Ticket #42: Fixed frobulation of hobnobs to correctly grouse the hobnob -jsmith?

2013-02-28 Reply Admin

The more ancient segments of the code base at work are littered with things like:

while (foo) {
  if (bad_condition) goto 99
  *snip*
  99:
  continue
}

Of course, the language it's written in doesn't actually support while loops (well, not as while loops). Or curly braces.

Occasionally, you'll even see:

10:
if (loop_condition) {
  *snip*
  goto 10
}

We obviously kill these things on sight.[/quote]

I'd be curious to see how you write assembler code without them.

2013-02-28 Reply Admin

Steve:
Or, y'know, you could let version control do its job and not leave redundant code all over the place.

Fair enough. I am Adam, it amused me to see something I'd noticed appear here for the first time, and I will mention that, while I did find a copy of this particular small project in our svn, it wasn't the most recent version of the project, compared to one that had been fiddled with by one person, then passed by email to someone else to fiddle with it. And yes, that is definitely what version control is for.

Another fun fact about the same project: when I got to the project, every time it was called (which was every http request for a particular site), it took a statically-defined array of literal strings, iterated through that static array adding each element to a new List, then did a Contains on that List to see if the page was whitelisted. Why the original coder (who I have honestly no idea who it was; nobody actually in our office, I don't think) didn't just define a static List with the whitelist strings instead, I'm pretty baffled. (I know, iterating through a list of a dozen or so strings creating a new list takes basically 0 time compared to an actual http request, and premature optimization is the devil and stuff, but it was just so bafflingly -ugly-, I had to fix it.)

Steve The Cynic · 2013-02-28 Reply Admin

Sizik:
((censored))

Do not invoke Codethulu!

2013-02-28 Reply Admin

In the first example, the RWTF is not escaping the quotes in the echoed string, right? ;-)

2013-02-28 Reply Admin

The last one should happen in any untyped language with a for each construct.

Works in python, at least

category = [4,5,6,7]
for category in category :
    print category
print category

2013-02-28 Reply Admin

Matt Westwood:
Oh fuck off! What's wrong with // Ticket #42: Fixed frobulation of hobnobs to correctly grouse the hobnob -jsmith?

Because that information is properly logged already if your commit message reads "Ticket #42: Fixed frobulation of hobnobs to correctly grouse the hobnob" and you are logged into git or SVN or whatever as jsmith?

shadowman · 2013-02-28 Reply Admin

for (;;) {

Ugh. That has to be some kind of amateurish attempt at micro-optimization. That completely missed the mark.

Loren Pechtel · 2013-02-28 Reply Admin

Could this be an example of a poorly-done fix?

try { if (_staff == null) throw new NullReferenceException(); } catch (NullReferenceException) { _staff = _provider.GetStaff(); }

Perhaps the original just threw and later someone said to handle it and it was fixed by a moron.

2013-02-28 Reply Admin

VS:
This is not a WTF!
Long time ago, before the while loop existed, this was the available loop with scope.

for(;;) { // do stuff if (something) break; }

Why wouldn't you put your conditional in the for statement? For that matter why not put your declaration and iteration in the for statement to?

2013-02-28 Reply Admin

Once again we're missing information to tell if the code is a real WTF or if it was valid given the date it was written, the language it was originally written in, the circumstances, well any sort of background.

2013-02-28 Reply Admin

Abusing the for construct to emulate a for loop is a wtf.

2013-02-28 Reply Admin

echo "<input type="text" name="row[]">
";

This is a syntax error...

In any case, TRWTF is having such a clunky for look in a "high-level" language in the first place.

And John found this one, which demonstrates PHP’s “flexibility”: foreach ($category as $category) {

While this is not a good way to program stuff, it's not one of those strange PHP quirks.

Python:

>>> a = [1, 2, 3]
>>> for a in a: print a
...
1
2
3
>>> a
3

Ruby says:

irb(main):001:0> a = 1..3
=> 1..3
irb(main):002:0> for a in a do puts a end
1
2
3
=> 1..3
irb(main):003:0> a
=> 3

chubertdev · 2013-02-28 Reply Admin

Anonymous Coward:
ObiWayneKenobi:
Steve:
Or, y'know, you could let version control do its job and not leave redundant code all over the place.
This. There is NO excuse beyond laziness or ignorance for having redundant code like that or, worse, having commented out code blocks "just in case" or // Ticket #42: Fixed frobulation of hobnobs to correctly grouse the hobnob -jsmith type of comments.
At my last job our rationale for doing this crap was a combination of "we've always done it this way" and "only managers have write access to the code repository."
I'll let that second point sink in for a bit.

Then you have two WTFs.

2013-02-28 Reply Admin

chubertdev:
Anonymous Coward:
At my last job our rationale for doing this crap was a combination of "we've always done it this way" and "only managers have write access to the code repository."
I'll let that second point sink in for a bit.

Then you have two WTFs.

Don't say these words! Now someone's gotta make a lame regex pun.

2013-02-28 Reply Admin

Nagesh:
Honnza:
if (dncrptList.Contains(destName))
{
   dId = SymmetricMethod.Decrypto(id);
}
else
{
   dId = SymmetricMethod.Decrypto(id);
}
isn't a WTF. It happens when the logic changes frequently. Rather than merge the two branches and then try to remember what the condition was when the logic requests diverging pathways, you simply leave an if statement stub that you can expect later.

Coding to specification is like walking on water. It's easier when it's frozen.
Agreed. We have similar situations in our coding.

This is why comments were invented:

// Note: Requirement_xyz was deleted, thus both branches of this if-statement are the same.
// We are leaving it this way in case the requirement changes again.
if (dncrptList.Contains(destName))
[snip]

chubertdev · 2013-02-28 Reply Admin

foo:
chubertdev:
Anonymous Coward:
At my last job our rationale for doing this crap was a combination of "we've always done it this way" and "only managers have write access to the code repository."
I'll let that second point sink in for a bit.

Then you have two WTFs.
Don't say these words! Now someone's gotta make a lame regex pun.

You start with one lame pun. Then you post it in a comment on TDWTF. Then you have two lame puns.

Something like that?

A Simple Misunderstanding

Leave a comment on “A Simple Misunderstanding”