• Me (unregistered)

    Not much to comment on really...

  • (cs)

    Is this article finished...?

  • (cs)

    Well, which was it? Many days and nights, or 20 hours?

  • BlackBart (unregistered)

    He forgot the module which performs 'automatic error reporting' back to engineering, so that every time you get FileNotFound, you can inspect the stack trace.

  • (cs)
    The Article:
    Only cowards use 'new' or 'malloc'.
    Only C programmers use malloc(). ;)

    Cowards avoid new() because they're afeared of memory leaks.

  • (cs) in reply to TehShrike
    TehShrike:
    Well, which was it? Many days and nights, or 20 hours?

    Both. 20 hours, but not all in a row.

  • Henning Makholm (unregistered) in reply to TehShrike
    TehShrike:
    Well, which was it? Many days and nights, or 20 hours?
    It will make some sense if you interpret it as "It took many days and nights to make it run. It only ran less than twenty hours before an already-scheduled demo with an Important Customer".

    This interpretation does involve some leaps of faith, though.

  • (cs)

    Heh, the mention of Dante reminds me of the following comment from the end of an Amazon review:

    "But even with these problems, The Story About Ping has earned a place on my bookshelf, right between Stevens' Advanced Programming in the Unix Environment, and my dog-eared copy of Dante's seminal work on MS Windows, Inferno. Who can read that passage on the Windows API ("Obscure, profound it was, and nebulous, So that by fixing on its depths my sight -- Nothing whatever I discerned therein."), without shaking their head with deep understanding."

  • This article sucks (unregistered)

    TRWTF is using an integer as a boolean expression

  • Paul Dianno (unregistered)

    Oh another project, another place. Oh another smile on another face. When you see me floating up beside you, You get the feeling that all my code's inside of you.

    Please take me away, take me away, so far away.

  • (cs)

    I'm curious why the word "error'd" was used (an apostrophe used in the manner of a contraction) when "errored" is exactly the same number of characters.

  • Edward (unregistered) in reply to evilspoons
    evilspoons:
    I'm curious why the word "error'd" was used (an apostrophe used in the manner of a contraction) when "errored" is exactly the same number of characters.

    Obviously a reference to the tag error'd used for some articles on this site.

  • Jadawin (unregistered) in reply to TehShrike
    TehShrike:
    Well, which was it? Many days and nights, or 20 hours?

    It's not a binary choice, really. If it's all like that, I can see needing long breaks between short, intense sessions.

    Appropriate CAPTCHA: Populus: what you're playing in-between to turn 20 hours into many days and nights.

  • JakeyC (unregistered) in reply to evilspoons
    evilspoons:
    I'm curious why the word "error'd" was used (an apostrophe used in the manner of a contraction) when "errored" is exactly the same number of characters.

    Here's the reas'n:

    http://thedailywtf.com/Series/Error_0x27_d.aspx

    Note to Akismet: not spam

  • Bryan (unregistered)
    Only cowards use 'new' or 'malloc'.
    Yes, but only heroes use both.
  • Your English Teacher (unregistered)

    TRWTF is the dangled participle.

  • Machtyn (unregistered)

    The way I read the many days and nights and 20 hours was that it took many days and nights to figure out and fix what the heck was going on, then 20 hours to get it to code correctly.

  • Machtyn (unregistered) in reply to Machtyn

    er, to get it to compile correctly.

  • (cs) in reply to Machtyn
    Machtyn:
    er, to get it to compile correctly.
    AKA "Finished."
  • Valerion (unregistered) in reply to Paul Dianno
    Paul Dianno:
    Oh another project, another place. Oh another smile on another face. When you see me floating up beside you, You get the feeling that all my code's inside of you.

    Please take me away, take me away, so far away.

    +100 internet points for the Iron Maiden reference.

  • (cs) in reply to JakeyC
    JakeyC:
    evilspoons:
    I'm curious why the word "error'd" was used (an apostrophe used in the manner of a contraction) when "errored" is exactly the same number of characters.

    Here's the reas'n:

    http://thedailywtf.com/Series/Error_0x27_d.aspx

    Note to Akismet: not spam

    Hmm. Seems out of place used as such in this article. (I am familiar with the Error'd section on this site). Ah well, I suppose.

  • (cs)

    Codethulhu lives on...

    Do not look directly at it!

  • (cs) in reply to Me
    Me:
    Not much to comment on really...

    Not much of a comment either...

  • (cs) in reply to frits
    frits:
    Machtyn:
    er, to get it to compile correctly.
    AKA "Finished."

    So was the result a release or a build?

  • Pierre (unregistered) in reply to Your English Teacher
    Your English Teacher:
    TRWTF is the dangled participle.

    Yeah. I found that ironic.

  • (cs) in reply to TehShrike
    TehShrike:
    Well, which was it? Many days and nights, or 20 hours?
    20 hours, but it felt like many days and nights.
  • (cs)
    If any call error’d in any way, it threw you straight into the debugger. No message, no warning, no excuses... In release mode, it silently logged the errors until it died.
    What do you expect? Handling errors properly is boring.

    Although I do have to wonder if the author ever noticed how silly it is to goof off in the debugger after an error has occurred.

  • XXXXX (unregistered)

    Actually not commenting code is a widely used form of employee evaluation. Give the employee a hige block of uncommented code and tell him or her to fix it. If he or she cannot determine what it does or how to debug and fix it, then the employee is not really good enough to work on the code in the first place.

    Developers often insert loopy, over-complicated, redundant, and useless red-herring code that breaks on certain specific dates and inputs just to test the new hires.

  • grow up (unregistered) in reply to Henning Makholm
    Henning Makholm:
    TehShrike:
    Well, which was it? Many days and nights, or 20 hours?
    It will make some sense if you interpret it as "It took many days and nights to make it run. It only ran less than twenty hours before an already-scheduled demo with an Important Customer".

    This interpretation does involve some leaps of faith, though.

    After several re-reads, I decided that this was the intention also.

    I wish I had worked on a project which was completed a full 20 hours before it was required. What did he do in those 20 hours? must have been a slacker.

  • (cs) in reply to nonpartisan
    nonpartisan:
    frits:
    Machtyn:
    er, to get it to compile correctly.
    AKA "Finished."

    So was the result a release or a build?

    Release is a synoymn for finish, no?

  • Heh (unregistered) in reply to Henning Makholm
    Henning Makholm:
    TehShrike:
    Well, which was it? Many days and nights, or 20 hours?
    It will make some sense if you interpret it as "It took many days and nights to make it run. It only ran less than twenty hours before an already-scheduled demo with an Important Customer".

    This interpretation does involve some leaps of faith, though.

    Personally, I think the meaning is obvious, but if you really had a problem understanding it, try reading it again below. I added one word.

    "After many days and nights of this worst-immaginable torment, Paul grimly got it working on the boss's laptop for a demo due in less than twenty hours. The boss blinked and then solemnly nodded in appreciation."

  • (cs) in reply to frits
    frits:
    nonpartisan:
    frits:
    Machtyn:
    er, to get it to compile correctly.
    AKA "Finished."

    So was the result a release or a build?

    Release is a synoymn for finish, no?

    The original statement was that it was able to compile correctly. You're the one who assumed that it was "finished." A correct compile doth not a release make . . . (or shouldn't automatically.)

  • (cs) in reply to nonpartisan
    nonpartisan:
    frits:
    Release is a synoymn for finish, no?

    The original statement was that it was able to compile correctly. You're the one who assumed that it was "finished." A correct compile doth not a release make . . . (or shouldn't automatically.)

    Whoa, look quick! Oh, nope, not fast enough. Damn. There was a joke flying right over your head, and you missed it.

    Just like the one before, apparently.

  • (cs) in reply to nonpartisan
    nonpartisan:
    frits:
    nonpartisan:
    frits:
    Machtyn:
    er, to get it to compile correctly.
    AKA "Finished."

    So was the result a release or a build?

    Release is a synoymn for finish, no?

    The original statement was that it was able to compile correctly. You're the one who assumed that it was "finished." A correct compile doth not a release make . . . (or shouldn't automatically.)

    Yes, but an automatic release is a nice suprise, no?

  • (cs) in reply to frits
    frits:
    nonpartisan:
    frits:
    nonpartisan:
    frits:
    Machtyn:
    er, to get it to compile correctly.
    AKA "Finished."

    So was the result a release or a build?

    Release is a synoymn for finish, no?

    The original statement was that it was able to compile correctly. You're the one who assumed that it was "finished." A correct compile doth not a release make . . . (or shouldn't automatically.)

    Yes, but an automatic release is a nice suprise, no?

    As long as it's not premature.

    Who didn't see this joke coming from a mile away? . . .

    Her apparently.

  • Ken B. (unregistered)
    Only cowards use 'new' or 'malloc'.
    Real programmers use butterflies.
  • An Old Hacker (unregistered) in reply to This article sucks
    This article sucks:
    TRWTF is using an integer as a boolean expression

    TopCod3r, is that you?

  • Nada (unregistered) in reply to This article sucks

    The real wtf is not knowing the difference between a value and an expression

  • ted (unregistered) in reply to Ken B.
    Ken B.:
    Only cowards use 'new' or 'malloc'.
    Real programmers use butterflies.

    I didn't even click on the link and knew it was some fag linking xkcd. It's not clever. It's not funny. Just the word "butterflies" with a link under it and the short, useless, one sentence post was all I needed to know that you were linking the cartoon where the programmers iteratively one-up each other on how they input a program.

    It was funny to read when it came out. It's even funny when clicking on the Random button on the site and seeing it. It's NOT funny when someone links to it from a one-sentence post and thinks they're so fucking clever to have discovered xkcd.

    You probably still use lmgtfy and think you're so damn clever.

    It means in real life, you're an unoriginal hipster doofus.

    Got anything to do with sanitizing inputs to a SQL database, etc.? Link to Bobby Tables. Got a nerd-project slow-ass turing machine? Like a minecraft logic circuit from redstone? Link to the one where it's some guy alone in the world making a computer out of rocks. Got a story about password security or encryption? Link to the one where they beat the password out of the guy with a wrench.

    Fuck off. You're not clever.

  • Word (unregistered) in reply to ted
    ted:
    Ken B.:
    Only cowards use 'new' or 'malloc'.
    Real programmers use butterflies.

    I didn't even click on the link and knew it was some fag linking xkcd. It's not clever. It's not funny. Just the word "butterflies" with a link under it and the short, useless, one sentence post was all I needed to know that you were linking the cartoon where the programmers iteratively one-up each other on how they input a program.

    It was funny to read when it came out. It's even funny when clicking on the Random button on the site and seeing it. It's NOT funny when someone links to it from a one-sentence post and thinks they're so fucking clever to have discovered xkcd.

    You probably still use lmgtfy and think you're so damn clever.

    It means in real life, you're an unoriginal hipster doofus.

    Got anything to do with sanitizing inputs to a SQL database, etc.? Link to Bobby Tables. Got a nerd-project slow-ass turing machine? Like a minecraft logic circuit from redstone? Link to the one where it's some guy alone in the world making a computer out of rocks. Got a story about password security or encryption? Link to the one where they beat the password out of the guy with a wrench.

    Fuck off. You're not clever.

    Word

  • Sylver (unregistered) in reply to XXXXX
    XXXXX:
    Actually not commenting code is a widely used form of employee evaluation. Give the employee a hige block of uncommented code and tell him or her to fix it. If he or she cannot determine what it does or how to debug and fix it, then the employee is not really good enough to work on the code in the first place.

    Developers often insert loopy, over-complicated, redundant, and useless red-herring code that breaks on certain specific dates and inputs just to test the new hires.

    Nice WTF! In less insane workplaces, candidates are tested before they are hired. Afterwards, they are expected to work, not to waste time fixing artificial f***-ups.

  • (cs) in reply to ted
    ted:
    ... angry rant...

    You go girl!

  • ted (unregistered) in reply to ted
    ted:
    Ken B.:
    Only cowards use 'new' or 'malloc'.
    Real programmers use butterflies.

    I didn't even click on the link and knew it was some fag linking xkcd. It's not clever. It's not funny. Just the word "butterflies" with a link under it and the short, useless, one sentence post was all I needed to know that you were linking the cartoon where the programmers iteratively one-up each other on how they input a program.

    It was funny to read when it came out. It's even funny when clicking on the Random button on the site and seeing it. It's NOT funny when someone links to it from a one-sentence post and thinks they're so fucking clever to have discovered xkcd.

    You probably still use lmgtfy and think you're so damn clever.

    It means in real life, you're an unoriginal hipster doofus.

    Got anything to do with sanitizing inputs to a SQL database, etc.? Link to Bobby Tables. Got a nerd-project slow-ass turing machine? Like a minecraft logic circuit from redstone? Link to the one where it's some guy alone in the world making a computer out of rocks. Got a story about password security or encryption? Link to the one where they beat the password out of the guy with a wrench.

    Fuck off. You're not clever.

    I mean... Do you have a fucking bookmark library with detailed descriptions of each comic so you can refer to it for clever-points?

    I never will understand what is with you people that link xkcd. If a recent (within last few days) xkcd was relevant, then you would be clever to link to it.

  • itsmo (unregistered) in reply to XXXXX
    XXXXX:
    Actually not commenting code is a widely used form of employee evaluation. Give the employee a hige block of uncommented code and tell him or her to fix it. If he or she cannot determine what it does or how to debug and fix it, then the employee is not really good enough to work on the code in the first place.

    Developers often insert loopy, over-complicated, redundant, and useless red-herring code that breaks on certain specific dates and inputs just to test the new hires.

    Do not feed the Troll

  • Paul (unregistered)

    I so wish I had not submitted this tale. Yes, it was me and I promise never to do it again. My captcha was 'appellatio'. It sounds like fun.

  • anon (unregistered) in reply to ted
    ted:
    Ken B.:
    Only cowards use 'new' or 'malloc'.
    Real programmers use butterflies.

    I didn't even click on the link and knew it was some fag linking xkcd. It's not clever. It's not funny. Just the word "butterflies" with a link under it and the short, useless, one sentence post was all I needed to know that you were linking the cartoon where the programmers iteratively one-up each other on how they input a program.

    It was funny to read when it came out. It's even funny when clicking on the Random button on the site and seeing it. It's NOT funny when someone links to it from a one-sentence post and thinks they're so fucking clever to have discovered xkcd.

    You probably still use lmgtfy and think you're so damn clever.

    It means in real life, you're an unoriginal hipster doofus.

    Got anything to do with sanitizing inputs to a SQL database, etc.? Link to Bobby Tables. Got a nerd-project slow-ass turing machine? Like a minecraft logic circuit from redstone? Link to the one where it's some guy alone in the world making a computer out of rocks. Got a story about password security or encryption? Link to the one where they beat the password out of the guy with a wrench.

    Fuck off. You're not clever.

    Oh how I wish there was an xkcd about people raging about xkcd links.

  • Duke of URL (unregistered)

    Make up your mind! Did it take him "many days and nights" or "less than twenty hours"?

  • Jay (unregistered) in reply to ted
    ted:
    ted:
    Ken B.:
    Only cowards use 'new' or 'malloc'.
    Real programmers use butterflies.

    I didn't even click on the link and knew it was some fag linking xkcd. It's not clever. It's not funny. Just the word "butterflies" with a link under it and the short, useless, one sentence post was all I needed to know that you were linking the cartoon where the programmers iteratively one-up each other on how they input a program.

    It was funny to read when it came out. It's even funny when clicking on the Random button on the site and seeing it. It's NOT funny when someone links to it from a one-sentence post and thinks they're so fucking clever to have discovered xkcd.

    You probably still use lmgtfy and think you're so damn clever.

    It means in real life, you're an unoriginal hipster doofus.

    Got anything to do with sanitizing inputs to a SQL database, etc.? Link to Bobby Tables. Got a nerd-project slow-ass turing machine? Like a minecraft logic circuit from redstone? Link to the one where it's some guy alone in the world making a computer out of rocks. Got a story about password security or encryption? Link to the one where they beat the password out of the guy with a wrench.

    Fuck off. You're not clever.

    I mean... Do you have a fucking bookmark library with detailed descriptions of each comic so you can refer to it for clever-points?

    I never will understand what is with you people that link xkcd. If a recent (within last few days) xkcd was relevant, then you would be clever to link to it.

    Wow, someone wasted 30 seconds of your time by telling you a joke you already heard, and it sends you into a vulgar tyrade? Surely you wasted far more of your own time writing this rant than the original poster cost you by "tricking" you into clicking on a link that you've already seen.

    Next time someone tells you a joke you've already heard, try just saying, "Sorry, I heard that one already" and changing the subject. Or ... here's a radical idea ... laugh politely.

    What do you do when a TV station shows a re-run? Attack the station with a machinge gun and kill the programming director and everyone else in sight?

    Feel free to reply with a profanity-laced rant. If composing it keeps you busy for a few minutes, it may save you from being arrested for beating up that co-workers who had the gall to say "good morning" twice today.

  • Henning Makholm (unregistered) in reply to Paul
    Paul:
    I so wish I had not submitted this tale. Yes, it was me and I promise never to do it again.
    Um, huh?

    You almost sound like people had been attacking you in the comments. But nobody seems to do so -- not by ordinary internet standards and certainly not by TDWTF ones.

    Okay, the story is a bit feh, and if judged as a work of fiction it sounds more like a build-up to a great punchline that we never get. But that doesn't mean there's something actively wrong with it. They can't all be instant classics. Nobody consistently produces only instant classics. And in any case, it is traditional to blame Alex rather than the submitter for any perceived faults in the story's rhythm and timing.

  • 0x20 (unregistered)

    in the end, paul will be stuck maintaining that code, and his boss will get a promotion. :-(

Leave a comment on “Another Project, Another Place”

Log In or post as a guest

Replying to comment #:

Log Out

« Return to Article