• rumpelstiltskin (unregistered) in reply to Alistair Wall
    Alistair Wall:
    The MAZZTer:

    AFHV keeps all the clips you send them (they become AFHV property) so when they get several new videos with a similar theme they can also pull out older footage and string them together (IE 6 short clips of people falling off jetskis in various ways). And out of all the new clips shown, one is chosen as the funniest (it's NEVER the one you as a viewer at home would choose though) and they get a large cash prize.

    PLEASE write 'ie' in lower case. Seeing 'IE 6' gave me a nasty turn.

    Or, better yet, use e.g. and i.e. correctly.

  • (cs) in reply to m0ffx
    m0ffx:
    Joe blow:
    The WTF is people spelling Copyright as Copy Write. Remember it is a "right" you exercise not something you "write" home about.
    Nope, it's you who's wrong.

    Copyright: blah blah blah <snip> Copywrite: yet another blah blah blah <snip>.

    They are different words, yada yada and on and on ad infinitum

    Copyright means nothing more than, "If you're going to copy this sucker, better do it right."

  • (cs)
    // 12-9-2006 Tired of debugging the app // so decided to consider success an // exception and on failure let it go on // warning: success shouldn't occur! public class SuccessException : Exception {
  • (cs) in reply to eff Five
    eff Five:
    there's a forums.microsoft.com post by a forums moderator that explains

    "The generic explanation for a www.thedailywtf.com error message like that..."

    http://forums.microsoft.com/MSDN/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=602258&SiteID=1

    Even they know its banged up.

    Well, there's glory for you. Recognition from the Redmond Beast!

    What's the betting that this particular "moderator" from 2006 has been subject to "Rendition with extreme prejudice?"

    And, off-topic, has anyone here found on-line MSDN or the related forums remotely useful in, oh, say, figuring out how to deploy side-by-side DLLs without pithering around with Admin rights and a pointless digital signature?

    I've spent something like two weeks, in my spare time between compilation and running tests (and obviously not reading TDWTF, because that would be Bad). I still don't know. I think I have an (ugly) solution, but it's all clouded in mystery, and the magic roundabout that is single-page MSDN support isn't exactly a vote of confidence.

  • (cs) in reply to rumpelstiltskin
    rumpelstiltskin:
    Alistair Wall:
    The MAZZTer:

    AFHV keeps all the clips you send them (they become AFHV property) so when they get several new videos with a similar theme they can also pull out older footage and string them together (IE 6 short clips of people falling off jetskis in various ways). And out of all the new clips shown, one is chosen as the funniest (it's NEVER the one you as a viewer at home would choose though) and they get a large cash prize.

    PLEASE write 'ie' in lower case. Seeing 'IE 6' gave me a nasty turn.

    Or, better yet, use e.g. and i.e. correctly.

    No punctuation in Latin abbreviations.

    Yrs,

    <Grammar Nazi/>
  • Grammar Stalinist (unregistered) in reply to real_aardvark

    "No punctuation in Latin abbreviations?" WTF?! Is this an inside joke I'm not privy to?

  • fargo (unregistered)

    I'm not like a super pro coder or anything, but for a number of win32 calls, an "error code" of 0 means success. So, what's the big deal?

    http://help.netop.com/support/errorcodes/win32_error_codes.htm

  • (cs) in reply to Grammar Stalinist
    Grammar Stalinist:
    "No punctuation in Latin abbreviations?" WTF?! Is this an inside joke I'm not privy to?
    Apparently so, yes.

    Not a particularly funny one. I prefer wooden tables and Paula Beans, myself.

  • gluecode joe (unregistered) in reply to Daniel Beardsmore
    Daniel Beardsmore:
    One example is X Window System software, which frequently connect to the window server on localhost. I've wondered if some sort of abstraction relating to this is why Firefox and Thunderbird both have to connect to themselves: ... If you close these connections, the program will sit at 100% CPU but will still functional otherwise normally. So I remain at a loss as to why it feels it necessary to create them.

    X Windows client connects to whichever X Windows server you tell it to. You can run thin clients which would all use a mainframe's Xserver if you wanted. I suspect if you did this that those Firefox and Thunderbird connections might be connected to the mainframe instead.

    At to why X has the server/client architecture...well, that's X for you

  • Anon (unregistered) in reply to real_aardvark
    real_aardvark:
    Well, there's glory for you. Recognition from the Redmond Beast!
    A "most valued professional" isn't an employee, just someone who spends too much time on message boards, and that is a link to a message board, not to Bill Gate's personal blog.

    Therefore all it proves is that at least one person who reads this site also posts to that site. :)

  • (cs)
    1. didn't get it ever while "fresh installing" or upgradind on dozens of machines. It is possble if message is manually marked as junk. Not WTF.
    2. Someone really throwed 0 - not WTF.
    3. Probably the PC is bot node or just have got some trojan/backdoor installed. Firewall did right thing: such machines must be unnetworked, even loopback should be off (only on windows of course).

    So this "Worse Than Failure" issue is WTF itself (it is better if author wait more time and collected real WTFs than publish such "off-topict" which I can find on hundreds of talentless anecdote and humour sites and boards).

    P.S. sorry for my english, my native language is russian.

  • Paul (unregistered) in reply to The MAZZTer
    The MAZZTer:
    I can't really think of a case where a program would connect to localhost to talk to itself or another program... it would be a WTF. I am not including programs that can by design connect to ANY address. Just ones that would ONLY connect to localhost. A non-WTF program which wanted to talk to itself or another process would most certainty use some other method which can't be blocked by firewall.
    What, like MySQL (for instance)?

    I know that the client can connect to any MySQL server - but the 'normal' behaviour is to configure MySQL users which can only be connected to from 'localhost' (gives it a bit more security). So, in that case the client HAS to connect to 'localhost' to access the server.

    In fact, using the loopback address is very common. If software installs server & client software on the same PC it will often use the loopback address as the default server for the client. It SHOULD work. Security software assuming that it's bad just because it's the loopback address is broken.

  • rumpelstiltskin (unregistered) in reply to real_aardvark
    real_aardvark:
    No punctuation in Latin abbreviations.

    Yrs,

    <Grammar Nazi/>

    If that is the case, I will stop using them. However, it does not appear to be the case. A few are commonly used without punctuation, like QED, but those usages seem to be by exception rather than by rule. Do you have a source for your claim?

  • Magnus (unregistered) in reply to gluecode joe
    gluecode joe:
    X Windows client connects to whichever X Windows server you tell it to. You can run thin clients which would all use a mainframe's Xserver if you wanted. I suspect if you did this that those Firefox and Thunderbird connections might be connected to the mainframe instead.

    At to why X has the server/client architecture...well, that's X for you

    Actually, what happens is that you run the client on the mainframe, and the server runs on your local workstation (your "thin client"). The client-server architecture in X is really backwards.

    And it doesn't apply to the Firefox/Thunderbird case, as the application (the client) runs on the mainframe.

  • Joel (unregistered) in reply to gluecode joe

    No, it's not really like that. While you can connect to the X server using TCP sockets, programs almost always connect to the local server using Unix domain sockets (anonymous pipes, or, at least on Linux, named pipes in the /tmp/.X11-unix directory).

    As for client server architecture, it's not just X. Every major windowing system, including on Windows, uses a client server architecture. On Mac, there's the WindowServer process which is responsible for dispatching events and rendering windows' backing store to the screen. On Windows, there's win32k.sys which originally lived as a true server process inside csrss.exe. It performs the same function more or less. A client-server architecture works well for windowing systems because it models the reality that you have one screen and one keyboard/mouse, which need to be shared among multiple programs (clients). Having a single server responsible for multiplexing input and demultiplexing output is a pretty reasonable design decision.

  • (cs) in reply to LogicDaemon
    LogicDaemon:
    So this "Worse Than Failure" issue is WTF itself (it is better if author wait more time and collected real WTFs than publish such "off-topict" which I can find on hundreds of talentless anecdote and humour sites and boards).

    P.S. sorry for my english, my native language is russian.

    Sorry. The real WTF is you pointing out that an Error'd post is not a WTF. It isn't supposed to be a WTFl it's an Error'd.

  • (cs) in reply to EvanED
    EvanED:
    webrunner:
    I've always thought that the error system in windows was a WTF by itself. The fact you can do something completely innocuous as part of your error handling code, and then lose the error completely, just seems like bad API design
    By "in windows" you must mean "in the C language". Unix systems have *exactly this problem* with errno.

    Library functions are not permitted (by the C or POSIX standards) to set errno to 0. You might get the wrong error (if an intervening library call had an error and set it to its own error code), but you won't get so-called "ESUCCESS".

    I don't think I've ever seen anyone provide an example "in the wild" of this happening at all on a unix system, but even if one exists, it's not C or Unix's fault that some implementations disregard the standards.

  • (cs) in reply to LogicDaemon
    LogicDaemon:
    2) Someone really throwed 0 - not WTF.
    Well, a WTF, but not VB's WTF.
    3) Probably the PC is bot node or just have got some trojan/backdoor installed. Firewall did right thing: such machines must be unnetworked, even loopback should be off (only on windows of course).
    Turning off the loopback interface never accomplishes anything.
  • amanda (unregistered)

    this u cant read ok so yea

  • Magnus (unregistered) in reply to Joel
    Joel:
    No, it's not really like that. While you can connect to the X server using TCP sockets, programs almost always connect to the local server using Unix domain sockets (anonymous pipes, or, at least on Linux, named pipes in the /tmp/.X11-unix directory).

    As for client server architecture, it's not just X. Every major windowing system, including on Windows, uses a client server architecture. On Mac, there's the WindowServer process which is responsible for dispatching events and rendering windows' backing store to the screen. On Windows, there's win32k.sys which originally lived as a true server process inside csrss.exe. It performs the same function more or less. A client-server architecture works well for windowing systems because it models the reality that you have one screen and one keyboard/mouse, which need to be shared among multiple programs (clients). Having a single server responsible for multiplexing input and demultiplexing output is a pretty reasonable design decision.

    Don't get me wrong, I like the X11 windows model. Perhaps the client-server model is more visible because the documentation actually speaks about clients and servers (and in fact it was the first thing we talked about in a X11 developer course I took many years ago). And the binary that talks to your graphics card is (correctly) referred to as the "server".

    It's just that people think the other way when they talk about clients and servers and very often get it wrong. When you know how X11 works, you realize that the other way is VERY wrong.

    I used to use X11 over TCP sockets frequently since I used to work with a major finance package that happened to come in a Motif version, but users had Windows desktops and so needed to install Hummingbird or similar X server software. This was before X11 traffic was considered insecure and people started tunnling X11 traffic through ssh instead.

  • CW (unregistered) in reply to Rod Horny
    Rod Horny:
    Dude:
    These just keep getting lamer by the day

    CAPTCHA=stinky

    Is that better?

    You forgot the embarrassingly forced pun.

    captcha: alarm - yes it is very alarming indeed!

  • (cs) in reply to rumpelstiltskin
    rumpelstiltskin:
    real_aardvark:
    No punctuation in Latin abbreviations.

    Yrs,

    <Grammar Nazi/>

    If that is the case, I will stop using them. However, it does not appear to be the case. A few are commonly used without punctuation, like QED, but those usages seem to be by exception rather than by rule. Do you have a source for your claim?

    Nope, I'm wrong here. (As so often...)

    For American usage, see http://www.bartleby.com/68/39/2139.html, although it's not really addressed to this point.

    For general usage, I refer you to a reputable academic of my (ancient) acquaintance, Larry Trask; v. http://www.informatics.sussex.ac.uk/department/docs/punctuation/node28.html I'm pleased to bow to Larry's superior knowledge and admit that my usage is, on reflection, ghastly...

  • Johnny Sane (unregistered)
    fgdg:
    *misplaced goldselling spam*
    Now THAT is a WTF.
  • Bob Hob (unregistered)

    Why does your computer block localhost?

Leave a comment on “Internal Feud”

Log In or post as a guest

Replying to comment #:

Log Out

« Return to Article