• ZachBora (unregistered)

    The real wtf is engineers programming.

  • ? (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.

    u mad

  • Stark (unregistered)
    article:
    After many days and nights of this worst-immaginable torment, Paul grimly got it working on the boss's laptop for a demo in less than twenty hours.

    So, it took many days and nights to fix. Additionally to the time spent fixing it, it also took another 20 hours with the Boss' laptop to install the application. Therefore it isn't either or, but instead both!

  • (cs) 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 blah blah boo-hoo blah...

    Fuck off. You're not clever.

    I know that I for one expect every single observation/thought/comment/joke/reference/troll/rant/etc that I read on an internet discussion board to be of the absolute highest standards of conversational etiquette.

    Surely I'm not expecting too much.

  • Boss's_devil (unregistered)

    "The boss blinked and then solemnly nodded in appreciation."

    This is TRWTF!! They are called 'bosses' because they aren't supposed to show appreciation!!

  • (cs) in reply to Jay
    Jay:
    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.

    <<boring rant trimmed>>

    Fuck off. You're not clever.

    <<more boring rant trimmed. Think of the electrons!>>

    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?

    You say that as though it's a bad thing.
  • foo (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.

    Oh look, he said random. teds head asplode.

  • (cs) in reply to foo
    foo:
    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.

    Oh look, he said random. teds head asplode.

    distant pop

    I think I just heard ted's head exploding...

    EDIT: oops, clicked submit too quickly. Didn't notice your "hidden" comment. Obviously my OCD text highlighting has failed me...

  • foo (unregistered) in reply to C-Octothorpe
    C-Octothorpe:
    EDIT: oops, clicked submit too quickly. Didn't notice your "hidden" comment. Obviously my OCD text highlighting has failed me...
    It was even funnier this way. After all you said you heard a distant pop ... ;-)
  • Calli Arcale (unregistered) in reply to java.lang.Chris;
    java.lang.Chris;:
    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."

    My grandma had a copy of that book, which I read many times at her house. It was a big deal in my childhood, right up there with "Are You My Mother?" Then, about a year ago (I think), my hubby stumbled upon that Amazon review and, despite having never heard of the book before, instantly had to buy it. So I got a huge nostalgia trip and we both shared a good geek joke too. ;-)

  • xkcd (unregistered) in reply to C-Octothorpe
    C-Octothorpe:
    foo:
    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.

    Oh look, he said random. teds head asplode.

    distant pop

    I think I just heard ted's head exploding...

    EDIT: oops, clicked submit too quickly. Didn't notice your "hidden" comment. Obviously my OCD text highlighting has failed me...

    Explosion you say?

    At any rate, I think Ken and Ted are the same person trolling him/herself.

  • grow up (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.

    Random xkcd links still make you lol? I have no problem with that

  • foo (unregistered) in reply to grow up
    grow up:
    Random xkcd links still make you lol? I have no problem with that
    Too late, sorry. Try a "frist" next time.
  • Rollin you (unregistered) in reply to xkcd
    xkcd:
    C-Octothorpe:
    foo:
    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.

    Oh look, he said random. teds head asplode.

    distant pop

    I think I just heard ted's head exploding...

    EDIT: oops, clicked submit too quickly. Didn't notice your "hidden" comment. Obviously my OCD text highlighting has failed me...

    Explosion you say?

    At any rate, I think Ken and Ted are the same person trolling him/herself.

    Trolling is not aloud here.

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

    [...rant...]

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

    Duty Calls.

    Askimet, thy name is ted.

  • Meh (unregistered)

    As a person who only reads xkcd strips when people link to them, almost all of these were new to me and I found them quite funny.

  • The Great Lobachevsky (unregistered) in reply to Calli Arcale

    I still have my copy from when I was a kid - now I'm going to have to put it with my programming books. :)I wonder if anyone has ever written a parody...

  • Meep (unregistered) in reply to ted
    ted:
    It means in real life, you're an unoriginal hipster doofus.

    Glad to see I'm not the only one who is sick of people posting xkcd links endlessly.

    But, he's probably a fat pasty nerd; you have to be scrawny and metrosexual to be a hipster.

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

    [...rant...]

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

    Duty Calls.

    Askimet, thy name is ted.

    Who needs a bible when you've got webcomics and internet memes?

  • foo (unregistered) in reply to xkcd
    xkcd:
    Explosion you say?
    Yes, I said Explosion. My hobby: Posting several xkcd references for the same topic.
  • trtrwtf (unregistered) in reply to anon
    anon:
    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.

    There is.

    (only posting it to make even more steam come out of Ted's ears...)

  • (cs)

    Someone else's captcha:

    Appelatio: I saw that movie!

  • Gibbon1 (unregistered) in reply to ZachBora
    ZachBora:
    The real wtf is engineers programming.

    Sometimes it's necessary because programmers aren't engineers.

  • Anon (unregistered) in reply to Gibbon1
    Gibbon1:
    ZachBora:
    The real wtf is engineers programming.

    Sometimes it's necessary because programmers aren't engineers.

    Yes, I think it has been established before: especially in the case of business software, programming is easy, software engineering is hard. So hard it is almost never done correctly.
  • another hipster fag (unregistered) in reply to trtrwtf
    trtrwtf:
    anon:
    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.

    There is.

    (only posting it to make even more steam come out of Ted's ears...)

    Ha ha guys, here's another xkcd link, someone pass me a penis so I can get in on the circle jerk!

  • Anon (unregistered) in reply to another hipster fag
    ted:
    I didn't even click on the link and...

    tl;dr

    another hipster fag:
    Ha ha guys...

    tl;dr

  • someguy (unregistered) in reply to Meep
    Meep:
    Who needs a bible when you've got webcomics and internet memes?
    Who needs a bible when you've got a barrel?
  • bar (unregistered) in reply to Anon
    Anon:
    ted:
    I didn't even click on the link and...

    tl;dr

    another hipster fag:
    Ha ha guys...

    tl;dr

    That's what you call tl;dr? Now, that's tl;dr!

  • (cs) in reply to Anon
    Anon:
    I think it has been established before: especially in the case of business software, programming is easy, software engineering is hard. So hard it is almost never done correctly.
    I wouldn't say that software engineering is hard, just that most programmers who attempt it have their priorities out of order from the start and thus encounter the usual series of resulting difficulties.
  • Peter (unregistered) in reply to itsmo
    itsmo:
    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
    Troll? Nonsense. XXXXX is now my hero for providing a great new excuse...

  • reductio ad ridiculum (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...(snip)...You're not clever.

    You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.

  • reductio ad ridiculum (unregistered) in reply to Meep
    Meep:
    ted:
    It means in real life, you're an unoriginal hipster doofus.

    Glad to see I'm not the only one who is sick of people posting xkcd links endlessly.

    But, he's probably a fat pasty nerd; you have to be scrawny and metrosexual to be a hipster.

    Well, it takes me a second to scroll past an xkcd link if I'd like to.

    It took me four seconds to read your post.

    I want my three seconds back.

    rar

  • Gunslinger (unregistered)

    Ok, what is the deal with all these places having only a single author for large code projects?

  • Gunslinger (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.

    Why so serious?

  • (cs)

    Mmmm, I love all the xkcd links to troll the idiots on rants about xkcd links. Mmmm.

  • Henning Makholm (unregistered) in reply to Gunslinger
    Gunslinger:
    Ok, what is the deal with all these places having only a single author for large code projects?
    Selection bias. Such places/projects are disproportionately likely to be a source of WTFs.
  • sh;eo r (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.

    That must be it....you can recall off the top of your head all these comics individually just to prove how you are infinitely smarter than the OP, but they must be using some link library. Wow.

    What a titmouse!

  • sh (unregistered) in reply to boog
    boog:
    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 blah blah boo-hoo blah...

    Fuck off. You're not clever.

    I know that I for one expect every single observation/thought/comment/joke/reference/troll/rant/etc that I read on an internet discussion board to be of the absolute highest standards of conversational etiquette.

    Surely I'm not expecting too much.

    Seconded

  • (cs) in reply to another hipster fag

    Wow, I dislike geek culture for the most part, and I found the xkcd parody was much less funny than the actual comics. They seem like they were written by some self-loathing nerd.

  • Grey (unregistered) in reply to frits

    Duh! Cowards use garbage collector, which is One Big Guaranteed Memory Leak. Though, "legal" one.

    P.S. Carthago delenda est! TRWTF is java.

  • (cs) in reply to Jay
    ted:
    It means in real life, you're an unoriginal hipster doofus.
    Unoriginal indeed...
    Jay:
    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.
    It depends if they scream it to the entire office, clapping their hands to their thighs.
  • dargor17 (unregistered)

    "Memory allocation? Only cowards use 'new' or 'malloc'." Does this mean he rewrote his own malloc? Is that even possible?

  • Dave (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.

    Another file another line, Another template, another time, Another build, another crash, I'm eating junk, feeling rash, Another night, I'm going mad, My woman's leaving, I feel sad, But I just love the life I lead, Another compile is what I need, More debugging my ears bleed, We Are The Coders

    -- Motorhead, "We Are The Coders".

  • oheso (unregistered) in reply to Rollin you
    Rollin you:
    Trolling is not aloud here.

    So ... silent?

    Captcha: Completely Automated Public Turing test to tell Computers and Humans Apart

  • eVil (unregistered) in reply to ted
    ted:
    ...Something about his mother not loving him enough during his formative years...

    Aaawww, diddums.

  • (cs) in reply to dargor17
    dargor17:
    Does this mean he rewrote his own malloc? Is that even possible?
    It's possible. It's rarely a good idea, but I encountered one time where it was useful; it was replacing a system allocator that used a global memory pool with a thread-aware one that reduced the amount of shared resource contention and so sped the rest of the code up by a substantial margin (it was necessarily malloc-heavy but the threads were largely isolated, so it was about a net 20% speedup on a 4-core system IIRC, a really quite nice gain for not too much effort). There are lower levels of memory management than malloc (and new), but they all work in OS pages so a malloc-like system is necessary. The system-provided one is typically very good, but not always perfect (due to necessary trade-offs).
  • khs (unregistered)

    I'm not sure of the problem with a versioning system using macros + header files? I guess it depends on how it's used, but the serialization parts of Boost use macros for versioning your serializable classes. I also don't see why template-heavy code is a bad thing unless you're scared of templates. The rest of it's fair enough though.

  • (cs) in reply to dkf
    dkf:
    dargor17:
    Does this mean he rewrote his own malloc? Is that even possible?
    It's possible. It's rarely a good idea, but I encountered one time where it was useful; it was replacing a system allocator that used a global memory pool with a thread-aware one that reduced the amount of shared resource contention and so sped the rest of the code up by a substantial margin (it was necessarily malloc-heavy but the threads were largely isolated, so it was about a net 20% speedup on a 4-core system IIRC, a really quite nice gain for not too much effort). There are lower levels of memory management than malloc (and new), but they all work in OS pages so a malloc-like system is necessary. The system-provided one is typically very good, but not always perfect (due to necessary trade-offs).
    I did it once too. When malloc'ing a certain memory block, I would allocate a few bytes extra and store information about the file name and line number where this malloc was called. It helped tremendously in tracking down a memory leak.

    Something like this: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/e5ewb1h3(v=vs.80).aspx

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

    I didn't even <snip> Fuck off. You're not clever.

    Yeah, and you know what I hate?! LOLCATS!!!!!

    *waits for people to post links to lolcats... yay!

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

    I didn't even <snip> Fuck off. You're not clever.

    Yeah, and you know what I hate?! LOLCATS!!!!!

    *waits for people to post links to lolcats... yay!

    You asked for LOLCATS? All ur memes are belong to xkcd.

Leave a comment on “Another Project, Another Place”

Log In or post as a guest

Replying to comment #:

Log Out

« Return to Article