The Daily WTF: Curious Perversions in Information Technology

PiisAWheeL · 2012-03-05 Reply Admin

I don't always write code, But when I do, I start with function doseq()

2012-03-05 Reply Admin

Not self-respecting programer is using scripting to try to be doing real work.

2012-03-05 Reply Admin

It seems to me like he had a list of test cases with some dates and their corresponding timestamp values, but it didn't state anywhere that those timestamp values are based on midnight Jan 1st 1970.

So he just took an arbitrary date, compared his results to the desired results, and added the difference.

2012-03-05 Reply Admin

PiisAWheeL:
I don't always write code, But when I do, I start with function doseq()

Stay thirsty my friends.

2012-03-05 Reply Admin

Nagesh:
Not self-respecting programer is using scripting to try to be doing real work.

Self respecting PROFESSIONALS use whatever tools fix the job. Sometimes that means using a scripted language.

Or, in Dan's case, that meant abusing a scripting language, apparently.

2012-03-05 Reply Admin

Nagesh:
Not self-respecting programer is using scripting to try to be doing real work.

Hey! I am forced to use scripting in my work for this contract.

But I guess you're right... I have lost a lot of self-respect while doing so.

2012-03-05 Reply Admin

doeq_amber()

Anketam · 2012-03-05 Reply Admin

Schmitter:
PiisAWheeL:
I don't always write code, But when I do, I start with function doseq()
Stay thirsty my friends.

His code carries weight that would break a less WTF man's jaw.

2012-03-05 Reply Admin

#11/4/2007 7:04:21 PM#

Maybe that's his birthday

ObiWayneKenobi · 2012-03-05 Reply Admin

Not surprised. I have yet to see any Classic ASP that was written correctly or anything remotely resembling an attempt to write correctly. Just the equivalent of a monkey typing out code, saving, running in a browser to see if it works, and then typing more code until there are no more errors.

2012-03-05 Reply Admin

4th of November or 11th of April?

2012-03-05 Reply Admin

Darn 4 and a half year old programmers...

galgorah · 2012-03-05 Reply Admin

I've found ASP.NET MVC to be a good replacement for classic ASP apps. With ASP.NET MVC you can keep all the old html for a bit and focus on moving code out of the pages. A web designer can then at a later point modernize the presentation without having to weed through code or wrangling with server controls that output their own html. As a result I've found it to be a real time saver over ASP.NET Webforms.

2012-03-05 Reply Admin

Philipp:
It seems to me like he had a list of test cases with some dates and their corresponding timestamp values, but it didn't state anywhere that those timestamp values are based on midnight Jan 1st 1970.
So he just took an arbitrary date, compared his results to the desired results, and added the difference.

Why not. The purpose of the code is to create a unique ID. And that is achieved. All right, basically, every second he loses 1 ID but if you only need some thousand IDs it should still be OK.

And no, he won't have year 2038 problem. His will come much later (or earlier, in case he needs 2 IDs in the same second)

CAPTCHA: ingenium, yes this guy was really creative

2012-03-05 Reply Admin

galgorah:
I've found ASP.NET MVC to be a good replacement for classic ASP apps. With ASP.NET MVC you can keep all the old html for a bit and focus on moving code out of the pages. A web designer can then at a later point modernize the presentation without having to weed through code or wrangling with server controls that output their own html. As a result I've found it to be a real time saver over ASP.NET Webforms.

With C# the code is really getting a lot better...

function doseq{ var a, b, c, d; b = DateTime.Parse("11/4/2007 7:04:21 PM").Ticks a = datediff("s", b, now);

    a = a + 1194231874;
    return a;

}

2012-03-05 Reply Admin

PiisAWheeL:
I don't always write code, But when I do, I start with function doseq()

I don't always test my code, but when I do it's in production.

CAPTCHA bene ... as in no bene-fit to testing.

2012-03-05 Reply Admin

Bill P. Godfrey:
4th of November or 11th of April?

Weeeelllll...

SELECT DATEADD(s, -1194231874,'11 apr 2007') 1969-06-06 20:55:26.000

SELECT DATEADD(s, -1194231874,'04 nov 2007') 1969-12-30 20:55:26.000

So 4th November comes a lot closer but seems to be off by 97474 seconds

2012-03-05 Reply Admin

Bill P. Godfrey:
4th of November or 11th of April?

Obviously!

2012-03-05 Reply Admin

hobbes:
Nagesh:
Not self-respecting programer is using scripting to try to be doing real work.
Self respecting PROFESSIONALS use whatever tools fix the job. Sometimes that means using a scripted language.

And fun fact: as long as the end user can push a button and The Magic Happens, they could give a flying toss about how it's done. If it works but it's stupid, it still works.

PiisAWheeL · 2012-03-05 Reply Admin

Anketam:
Schmitter:
PiisAWheeL:
I don't always write code, But when I do, I start with function doseq()
Stay thirsty my friends.
His code carries weight that would break a less WTF man's jaw.

A man so important, he has his own epoch.

2012-03-05 Reply Admin

Bill P. Godfrey:
4th of November or 11th of April?

2007th of April in the year 11.

2012-03-05 Reply Admin

ClaudeSuck.de:
Philipp:
It seems to me like he had a list of test cases with some dates and their corresponding timestamp values, but it didn't state anywhere that those timestamp values are based on midnight Jan 1st 1970.
So he just took an arbitrary date, compared his results to the desired results, and added the difference.

Why not. The purpose of the code is to create a unique ID. And that is achieved. All right, basically, every second he loses 1 ID but if you only need some thousand IDs it should still be OK.

And no, he won't have year 2038 problem. His will come much later (or earlier, in case he needs 2 IDs in the same second)

CAPTCHA: ingenium, yes this guy was really creative

Now all this guy needs is some mechanism for preventing more than one request for a new unique ID each second.

2012-03-05 Reply Admin

Anketam:
Schmitter:
PiisAWheeL:
I don't always write code, But when I do, I start with function doseq()
Stay thirsty my friends.
His code carries weight that would break a less WTF man's jaw.

He refactored 10,000 lines of code with a single semicolon.

jes · 2012-03-05 Reply Admin

From where I sit, it doesn't give a Unix timestamp, since the magic number corresponds to Nov 5 04:04:34 2007 local time.

2012-03-05 Reply Admin

jes:
From where I sit, it doesn't give a Unix timestamp, since the magic number corresponds to Nov 5 04:04:34 2007 local time.

He wanted to make sure that it was unique - syncing up with Unix timestamp would have resulted in collisions with all of the other unique IDs generated using real Unix timestamps

mott555 · 2012-03-05 Reply Admin

ClaudeSuck.de:
galgorah:
I've found ASP.NET MVC to be a good replacement for classic ASP apps. With ASP.NET MVC you can keep all the old html for a bit and focus on moving code out of the pages. A web designer can then at a later point modernize the presentation without having to weed through code or wrangling with server controls that output their own html. As a result I've found it to be a real time saver over ASP.NET Webforms.

With C# the code is really getting a lot better...

function doseq{ var a, b, c, d; b = DateTime.Parse("11/4/2007 7:04:21 PM").Ticks a = datediff("s", b, now);
    a = a + 1194231874;
    return a;
}

Doesn't compile. In C#, you can't declare a variable using the "var" keyword without initializing it at the same time. The compiler will replace "var" with whatever type it is initialized to.

You could probably use the "dynamic" keyword however...

C-Octothorpe · 2012-03-05 Reply Admin

galgorah:
I've found ASP.NET MVC to be a good replacement for classic ASP apps. With ASP.NET MVC you can keep all the old html for a bit and focus on moving code out of the pages. A web designer can then at a later point modernize the presentation without having to weed through code or wrangling with server controls that output their own html. As a result I've found it to be a real time saver over ASP.NET Webforms.

That, and you don't have to fight with the god-awful "page lifecycle", and that each control may or maynot participate in it.

2012-03-05 Reply Admin

airdrik:
ClaudeSuck.de:
Philipp:
It seems to me like he had a list of test cases with some dates and their corresponding timestamp values, but it didn't state anywhere that those timestamp values are based on midnight Jan 1st 1970.
So he just took an arbitrary date, compared his results to the desired results, and added the difference.

Why not. The purpose of the code is to create a unique ID. And that is achieved. All right, basically, every second he loses 1 ID but if you only need some thousand IDs it should still be OK.

And no, he won't have year 2038 problem. His will come much later (or earlier, in case he needs 2 IDs in the same second)

CAPTCHA: ingenium, yes this guy was really creative

Now all this guy needs is some mechanism for preventing more than one request for a new unique ID each second.

I know when he ports this over to .net he could fix the duplicate ID problem easily. He can create a semaphore with a max count of one. Every time he wants an id he can call WaitOne first. Then have a timer that calls release every second. Brilliant, no duplicate ids.

2012-03-05 Reply Admin

Annonymous:
airdrik:
ClaudeSuck.de:
Philipp:
It seems to me like he had a list of test cases with some dates and their corresponding timestamp values, but it didn't state anywhere that those timestamp values are based on midnight Jan 1st 1970.
So he just took an arbitrary date, compared his results to the desired results, and added the difference.

Why not. The purpose of the code is to create a unique ID. And that is achieved. All right, basically, every second he loses 1 ID but if you only need some thousand IDs it should still be OK.

And no, he won't have year 2038 problem. His will come much later (or earlier, in case he needs 2 IDs in the same second)

CAPTCHA: ingenium, yes this guy was really creative

Now all this guy needs is some mechanism for preventing more than one request for a new unique ID each second.

I know when he ports this over to .net he could fix the duplicate ID problem easily. He can create a semaphore with a max count of one. Every time he wants an id he can call WaitOne first. Then have a timer that calls release every second. Brilliant, no duplicate ids.

Yeah, then he would need a mechanism to ensure that his mechanism to ensure no duplicate IDs doesn't throw exceptions when it is released too often.

Steve The Cynic · 2012-03-05 Reply Admin

Annonymous:
Yeah, then he would need a mechanism to ensure that his mechanism to ensure no duplicate IDs doesn't throw exceptions when it is released too often.

Auto-reset Event, *set* once a second by the background thread.

mott555 · 2012-03-05 Reply Admin

Steve The Cynic:
Annonymous:
Yeah, then he would need a mechanism to ensure that his mechanism to ensure no duplicate IDs doesn't throw exceptions when it is released too often.
Auto-reset Event, *set* once a second by the background thread.

He needs a Java web service with a method that sleeps for a second before returning. Then this method can have the synchronized keyword set. All calls get queued up, get called sequentially, wait a second, and then return. The original project can use this web service as an "enterprise synchronization library."

2012-03-05 Reply Admin

Ben Jammin:
Nagesh:
Not self-respecting programer is using scripting to try to be doing real work.
Hey! I am forced to use scripting in my work for this contract.
But I guess you're right... I have lost a lot of self-respect while doing so.

This is being like hoaring urself out for the monies. Here in Hyderabad, we are having grecful alternatives to this.

2012-03-05 Reply Admin

ClaudeSuck.de:
Philipp:
It seems to me like he had a list of test cases with some dates and their corresponding timestamp values, but it didn't state anywhere that those timestamp values are based on midnight Jan 1st 1970.
So he just took an arbitrary date, compared his results to the desired results, and added the difference.

Why not. The purpose of the code is to create a unique ID. And that is achieved. All right, basically, every second he loses 1 ID but if you only need some thousand IDs it should still be OK.

And no, he won't have year 2038 problem. His will come much later (or earlier, in case he needs 2 IDs in the same second)

Unless his code gets called twice in the same second. I am willing to believe that he was creative enough to make this system work so piss poorly slow to prevent that.

2012-03-05 Reply Admin

Epoch WTF

2012-03-05 Reply Admin

not even starting on the fact that all the variables are Variant...

2012-03-05 Reply Admin

ObiWayneKenobi:
Not surprised. I have yet to see any Classic ASP that was written correctly or anything remotely resembling an attempt to write correctly. Just the equivalent of a monkey typing out code, saving, running in a browser to see if it works, and then typing more code until there are no more errors.

Wow! What planet do you live on? Can I move there? Please???

2012-03-05 Reply Admin

Gruntbuggly:
Bill P. Godfrey:
4th of November or 11th of April?

Weeeelllll...

SELECT DATEADD(s, -1194231874,'11 apr 2007') 1969-06-06 20:55:26.000

SELECT DATEADD(s, -1194231874,'04 nov 2007') 1969-12-30 20:55:26.000

So 4th November comes a lot closer but seems to be off by 97474 seconds

Look at it the other way: select dateadd(s, 1194231874, '1970-01-01') 2007-11-05 03:04:34.000

The reference date for Dan's Epoch appears to be UTC -8 and the conversion is off by 11 seconds.

2012-03-05 Reply Admin

He was just testing the robustness of his code by adding simulated leap seconds. We can see that even with 1194231874 extra leap seconds his program still works. Awesome future-proofing!

2012-03-05 Reply Admin

Minos:
Look at it the other way: select dateadd(s, 1194231874, '1970-01-01') 2007-11-05 03:04:34.000
The reference date for Dan's Epoch appears to be UTC -8 and the conversion is off by 11 seconds.

That '1970-01-01' literal is subject to locale-specific mangling. Here's what PostgreSQL gives me:

> select timestamptz 'epoch';
      timestamptz       
------------------------
 1969-12-31 19:00:00-05
(1 row)

> SELECT timestamptz 'epoch' + '1194231874 seconds';
        ?column?        
------------------------
 2007-11-04 22:04:34-05
(1 row)

It appears Dan's Epoch is based on central time (UTC-6), and the conversion is off by 13 seconds.

2012-03-05 Reply Admin

Annonymous:
airdrik:
Now all this guy needs is some mechanism for preventing more than one request for a new unique ID each second.
I know when he ports this over to .net he could fix the duplicate ID problem easily. He can create a semaphore with a max count of one. Every time he wants an id he can call WaitOne first. Then have a timer that calls release every second. Brilliant, no duplicate ids.

Too complicated. Simply sleep for a second within the code that grabs the ID, and then release the semaphore yourself. No timers, no multiple threads, no "what happens if I release the semaphore when its not locked", no...

Mason Wheeler · 2012-03-05 Reply Admin

1194231874? Wow! That's the combination on my luggage!

2012-03-05 Reply Admin

airdrik:
ClaudeSuck.de:
Philipp:
It seems to me like he had a list of test cases with some dates and their corresponding timestamp values, but it didn't state anywhere that those timestamp values are based on midnight Jan 1st 1970.
So he just took an arbitrary date, compared his results to the desired results, and added the difference.

Why not. The purpose of the code is to create a unique ID. And that is achieved. All right, basically, every second he loses 1 ID but if you only need some thousand IDs it should still be OK.

And no, he won't have year 2038 problem. His will come much later (or earlier, in case he needs 2 IDs in the same second)

CAPTCHA: ingenium, yes this guy was really creative

Now all this guy needs is some mechanism for preventing more than one request for a new unique ID each second.

function doseq() dim a, b, c, d b = #11/4/2007 7:04:21 PM# a = datediff("s", b, now)

a = a + 1194231874
doseq = a
sleep 1

end function

FTFY

frits · 2012-03-05 Reply Admin

TRWTF is time zones. All locales should be on universal time.

2012-03-05 Reply Admin

Ken B.:
Annonymous:
airdrik:
Now all this guy needs is some mechanism for preventing more than one request for a new unique ID each second.
I know when he ports this over to .net he could fix the duplicate ID problem easily. He can create a semaphore with a max count of one. Every time he wants an id he can call WaitOne first. Then have a timer that calls release every second. Brilliant, no duplicate ids.
Too complicated. Simply sleep for a second within the code that grabs the ID, and then release the semaphore yourself. No timers, no multiple threads, no "what happens if I release the semaphore when its not locked", no...

Or simply use an identity column.

2012-03-05 Reply Admin

"The over-eager dim a, b, c, d is how Dan began every function. I have found some that declare nearly every letter. But even stranger than that, Option Explicit is never enabled in any of his scripts."

Even if Option Explicit is not turned on, declaring variables early does make a positive difference in performance in ASP code. So it's not really that strange.

2012-03-05 Reply Admin

frits:
TRWTF is time zones. All locales should be on universal time.

If everyone using your app is in one time zone, I fail to see a reason to add the complexity of converting to and from some magic universal time.

2012-03-05 Reply Admin

Ben Jammin:
Nagesh:
Not self-respecting programer is using scripting to try to be doing real work.
Hey! I am forced to use scripting in my work for this contract.
But I guess you're right... I have lost a lot of self-respect while doing so.

If we had any self-respect, would we be posting on this site?

2012-03-05 Reply Admin

geoffrey:
"The over-eager dim a, b, c, d is how Dan began every function. I have found some that declare nearly every letter. But even stranger than that, Option Explicit is never enabled in any of his scripts."
Even if Option Explicit is not turned on, declaring variables early does make a positive difference in performance in ASP code. So it's not really that strange.

The problem with "dim a,b,c,d" is not that it causes a performance problem, but that variables should be given meaningful names an not just sequentially lettered or numbered.

2012-03-05 Reply Admin

A Gould:
hobbes:
Nagesh:
Not self-respecting programer is using scripting to try to be doing real work.
Self respecting PROFESSIONALS use whatever tools fix the job. Sometimes that means using a scripted language.

And fun fact: as long as the end user can push a button and The Magic Happens, they could give a flying toss about how it's done. If it works but it's stupid, it still works.

Bingo. Although it's a bad habit to fall into thinking this way, it's still true.

Proper coding techniques are, unsurprisingly, language-agnostic. You can do it right regardless of the language, just as you can do it horribly horribly wrong regardless of the language.

2012-03-05 Reply Admin

Minos:
Gruntbuggly:
Bill P. Godfrey:
4th of November or 11th of April?

Weeeelllll...

SELECT DATEADD(s, -1194231874,'11 apr 2007') 1969-06-06 20:55:26.000

SELECT DATEADD(s, -1194231874,'04 nov 2007') 1969-12-30 20:55:26.000

So 4th November comes a lot closer but seems to be off by 97474 seconds

Look at it the other way: select dateadd(s, 1194231874, '1970-01-01') 2007-11-05 03:04:34.000

The reference date for Dan's Epoch appears to be UTC -8 and the conversion is off by 11 seconds.

And perhaps those are leap seconds?

Dan's Epoch

Leave a comment on “Dan's Epoch”