- Feature Articles
- CodeSOD
-
Error'd
- Most Recent Articles
- Stop Poking Me!
- Operation Erred Successfully
- A Dark Turn
- Nothing Doing
- Home By Another Way
- Coast Star
- Forsooth
- Epic
- Forums
-
Other Articles
- Random Article
- Other Series
- Alex's Soapbox
- Announcements
- Best of…
- Best of Email
- Best of the Sidebar
- Bring Your Own Code
- Coded Smorgasbord
- Mandatory Fun Day
- Off Topic
- Representative Line
- News Roundup
- Editor's Soapbox
- Software on the Rocks
- Souvenir Potpourri
- Sponsor Post
- Tales from the Interview
- The Daily WTF: Live
- Virtudyne
Admin
Wow.
Btw alex, did you get an oracle to feed your captcha the words?
Mine says bedtime, and thats sure something that should apply to that vendor after say, 20:00?
Admin
ok So I'm confused, did they fail to succeed or succeed to fail, and by doing so did they succeed where others fail. If it "worked properly" in QA does this mean they were getting the right results, or not getting any results which was expected.
This one just makes my head hurt.
Admin
Nice, another one to add to the list from yesterday.
War is peace.
Freedom is slavery.
Bugs are features.
Failures are sucessess.
<!-- End: CommunityServer.Discussions.Controls.PostDisplay.TextPost -->Admin
There are no errors as long as I don't know about them.
Admin
I've known some programmers who use that trick all the time!
foreach (Item item in list) {
try {
// do horribly risky stuff to item
} catch (Throwable t) { }
}
If at least 80% or so of the items get processed correctly, nobody will notice!
Admin
Admin
When at first you dont succeed, wipe out all traces of failure.
And redefine success as well.
Captcha: truthiness ; heh, yea. Very appropriate.
Admin
I read the title and thought:
#define TRUE 0
#define FALSE 1
I'm glad I was wrong -- this is much more fun.
Admin
Seen on license-plate-like wall-placard in store window in Times Square:
"If at first you don't succeed, redefine success"
Admin
Haha! I had to fix some code that did just this type of thing. The guy tried to manage his own threading in C# and had done it horribly (C# will handle threading for you for the most part if you just tell it to). Anyway he was trying to clean up a thread or something and did something like this (psuedo-C# here):
try
{
someThread.Exit();
}
catch (Exception)
{
}
// go about our business as if the thread had exited normally.
So apparently the FAILURE == SUCCESS is true for many programmers *shakes head*
Admin
This is good one ... I like it.
WTF++
Admin
So let's get this straight - the vendor was allowed to update the production machine directly? Without going through any form of test environment first? Without informing the company? But when it blew up it was the company's own staff who had to track down the problem?
Admin
public static int SUCCESS_CODE = 1;
public static int ERROR_CODE = SUCCESS_CODE;
Admin
Ponder the thought processes of the person who might have written this:
Admin
This is amazingly common in the Financial world. They vendors even have the gall to bill the companies for the fix, more often than not.
Admin
Yeah, and then a guy who works for the company who lets this happen, mocks the vending company. "HaHa- they can't write code! They're so stupid."
At least, I think that's what's happening. I can never be too sure on TDWTF, who exactly is mocking whom.
Admin
At the company I work at, "Success" is defined using a slightly expanded definition of success. Fortunately, it's not nearly as bad as the above example. When we deliver our product to our customer, success is defined as "All test cases pass, or a known defect/omission/delay causes them to fail." The key word there is "known." Many of these defects are in our customer's code (which we interface with), and are impossible to work around, so really it's not that absurb. I still get an awful whever I see us saying "50% of the test cases pass... SUCCESS!"
Admin
The government works this way, so why shouldn't your vendors?
Admin
<pointless>
<rant>
I hate to be the troll who picks on grammar but when I read this it hurt. My Problem lied in the incorrect use of lied.
</rant>
</pointless>
Admin
Seems to me that we just need to define something along the lines of "truthiness;" perhaps we should call it "successiness." Maybe "counter-failiness."
Nah.
Anyway, there's nothing new to accepting failure as success. The public schools do it all the time.
Admin
Now what I'm really saying is obvious isn't it?!?!?!?! I.e read between the lines!
lol I had a vendor do this once....we are on time and under budget. No failures. We have no bugs to report and all is well....
kudos on the SPI response we need that here!
Admin
This would make a great management slogan (you know, for morale-boosting and such):
"Success is not an option."
Admin
No, no, no! It's far better to do:
foreach (Item item in list) {
try {
// do horribly risky stuff to item
} catch (Exception ex)
{
#if not DEBUG
throw; // Exceptions are annoying to debug around
#endif
}
}
Admin
Is it just me or that red lamp picture has hypnotizing powers?
Admin
You, sir, are a horrible person. ;)
Admin
I enjoy our company's philosophy of "protect the user from pesky errors that may otherwise make them lose faith in the truthfullness and reliability of our company and cause them to slit their own wrists in desperation and you don't want to be responsible for corporate suicide DO YOU??"
Actually, that's just my interpretation. I believe the upper-ups call it "Failing Gracefully", or in the more wince-inducing cases "Ignorable Errors".
IE: When an error occurs that we can't recover from, pop a message-box that tells them there is a problem and to call the company (with no error code, logging, or stack-traces). If it's not a fatal error, we recover from it by pretending it didn't happen.
They key here is, DON'T PANIC... (the people who pay us).
Admin
This is how you code for enterprisey solutions. They should have been more clear about the web service in the documentation, something like:
This web service returns a tri-state boolean: True, False, ERROR_SUCCESS
Captcha: paula
Admin
I agree, the picture has hypnotizing magic
captcha: genius - No, not really.
Admin
The software worked just like it was supposed to. This is more of a WTF/TCTFM (They Changed The Fine Manual)
Admin
Admin
Most people seem to have missed the point. Specific failures where not ignored. That can be acceptable.
The WTF is that ALLLLL 403 errors in the application are ignored.
Admin
#define TRUE 1
#define FALSE 1
Admin
What's the problem? Just wrap it in a "try {} catch(Throwable t) {}" -block and let it loop 5000 times if it fails...
Captcha: pizza?
Admin
Admin
This actually makes sense. Well, sort of.
Users _do_ panic when they see an error message, usually to the extent that they forget to read the error message, press printscreen or produce any kind of sensible reaction.
Therefore I don't see much point in annoying them with stack traces or debug infos, those are meant to be read by developers and should be sent directly to them. (Or at least saved to disk or something.)
A single sentence of error message will suffice in most cases.
Admin
Some places I've worked in the past have had an "auto-update" feature turned on. Like Windows' one. Good fun when they slip something like this WTF through unannounced.
Admin
That's the most unintentionally beautiful grammatical error I've ever seen. Yes, that should have been "the issue ... lay in its external interface." But there's another way to correct it: remove the first three words of the sentence. Behold:
"Their system lied in its external interface."
Yes. Yes, indeed, it did. :-)
Admin
Ok, I'm sick of going back and fixing it every time this text box eats a space. Ifthis post is badly formatted, it's not my fault. Seriously, WTF? There are thousands of BB systems on the net, why is this one the onlyone that sucks?
Aha, they're using libcurl! (Or at least, I've run into this exact problem with libcurl.)
The curl function to download a file has, as you'd expect, errorcodes andmethods to get the associated messages and all that good stuff. But, non-intuitively, they only return errors returned by curl itself (like "operation timed out" or "invalid parameters"). If the HTTP request returns an HTTP error, youget a result that looksjust fine,except the page contents are a simple 404(or whatever)page and the code isn't 200.
So the obvious way to use curl, which is tojust call the download function and check the return value, assuming that your library will helpfully translate HTTP return codes, is wrong - you have to do two error checks, once for libcurl errors and once for the actual HTTP errors. Needless to say, there's lots of hurriedly written code that doesn't bother, especially in projects which are mainly not web-related at all andonly contain one lousy routine to fetch a status page from somewhere.
So this vendor probably used either libcurl or something else that works the same way, and just noticedand fixed this obvious bug in it - which was hiding the real bug, which is that the page it was depending on didn't work. The "correct" fix would be to take that whole module outof the system, since it's not being used, or at least mark it optional so that errors it causes won't bring the whole system down - but thefast and easy fix is just to revert the "fix" that mucked everything up.
Admin
+1, Insightful
Admin
Reminds me of a function a co-worker of mine once wrote:
if (value==true)
{
return true;
}
else
{
return 1;
}
Hehe... another co-worker reminded me of the code that this same guy wrote that was really cool because it didn't have bugs
'Suppress errors until batch has finished processing
Try
'Perform Task
Catch ex As Exception
'Do Nothing
End Try
Admin
I love these :)
When I'm working on some legacy code I frequently change these kinds of statements to their "normal" counterparts.
I'd try to convert it to something like: return value ? true : 1; but I've not heard of a type called a "boolint" :)
Maybe it could be like this:
enum boolint
{
true,
false,
1,
FileNotFound
}
Admin
And remember, if we don't succeed, we run the risk of failure!
Admin
Admin
"The issue with their system lied in its external interface"
Grammar nitpicking: 'to lie', meaning 'to place', is an irregular verb. The past tense of it is 'lay'. 'To lie', meaning 'to deceive', is more regular: it has 'lied' as the past tense.
So, when I read that sentence, I thought the problem was that the external interface was lying. Which was (unintentionally, I think) true!
Admin
Admin
I used to get this error in WorldCraft all the time when it tried to copy a file that didnt exist:
Error: The command completed succesfully.
CAPTCHA: shut the fuck up
Admin
Might as well give them error code 42 for every one of those errors.
Admin
Don't forget the SOAP wrapper.
Admin
I have had a situation before where I was responsible for writing the system test plan and testing my own code.
If I had read this story before hand, I could have saved myself so much drama. I'll remember this in future, thanks.
Admin
I always wondered how they could get these kinds of error messages until i got one in a soft i wrote.
I remember saying out loud in the office : "WTF !! Error: No Error ??"
My coworkers came to check and we had a good laugth :D