• Matt (unregistered) in reply to jdubya
    jdubya:
    Anyone notice this was actionscript? Also, please do tell me how you can create a SOA in flash?
    1. none of those properties are "objects" but rather instances of art on the stage.
    2. actionscript had the most relaxed runtime rules in history, basically bad javascript with all of those minimal rules removed (at least javascript could throw a runtime error)
    3. the compiler (if you can call it that) couldn't check for squat errors other than missing parens and brackets.

    All this lead to some of the worst code ever written in history.

    Wait, what? I see nothing vaguely identifying of ActionScript, and it's certainly not using any ECMAScript4 constructs. Looks like vanilla Javascript (i.e. ECMAScript3) to me.

    ...doesn't change the fact that somehow a VB <> got mixed in there...and that it makes me want to retch in generally...

  • (cs)

    I used to be an "Information Systems Administrator", now I'm just an "Analyst/Programmer" but I'm looking to become a HPC.

  • Drift (unregistered)

    TRWTF is I had to scroll all the way to the bottom of 50 comments before someone FINALLY cited "browser-based interactive multimedia delivery system framework".

    AND it was someone calling themselves "Swiet and Seksy". By jingo!

  • (cs)

    Wow. If I were working there, my two weeks notice would be sent in right now, no matter the job market. At least as a Fried Potato Specialist you can be sure your employer still exists a week from now.

    Seriously, ships of fools are not a good place to stay on; get the hell out before it starts to look bad on the resume. :-/

  • JimJim (unregistered) in reply to jdubya

    Couldn't agree more;

    Actionscript is the worst thing to debug:

    a) no variable declaration, no typing b) accessing undefined variable is shown only at run time, no warning whatever c) arrays are accessed by self-constructed strings (of course, what else ?) d) macromedia director has more option than a boeing

    Oh god, I swear I can open macromedia where I work and paste identical code...

  • (cs) in reply to MadKat
    MadKat:
    <blink seriously="why does any browser support this any more?!?!">Obnoxiously</blink>

    Fantastic.

    CAPTCHA - pirates Yaaaaar!

    Wow... I hadn't noticed it blinking... Perhaps because it doesn't in my browser.

  • Franz Kafka (unregistered) in reply to AGould
    AGould:
    Generally it's only useful for "my title is longer than yours" fights. *shrug*

    Isnt' the trick with titles to get the shortest one you can? CEO is pretty short.

  • Maarten (unregistered)

    The real WTF (tm) is of course that no-one ever looked at the attribute in the blink tag. It made me smile anyway.

    Captcha: bling(-tag)

  • Twon (unregistered) in reply to SteveG
    SteveG:
    It's the last case in the code that makes this one art - the commented-out call to something called lock().

    I was scared when I was seeing "lock()" as the last thing in cases, but now that I know it's debatable whether you should even call it, I'm terrified.

    Don't worry, it's ActionScript! I don't think it has any kind of actual synchronization, so calling lock() probably just puts an image of a lock in the middle of the stage or something :)

  • Jon A (unregistered) in reply to nobody

    Trevor, have you tried putting insolent or nonsensical when you commit your changes? I do.

  • (cs) in reply to Island Usurper
    Island Usurper:
    I appreciate the "seriously" attribute on the blink tag.

    Indeed!

  • (cs) in reply to mr_ed
    deborahgsmith:
    Even better than the blink tag: (Please ... Alex ... get rid of that!!)
    mr_ed:
    The "Remove This Object" is a WONDERFUL extension for Firefox. One right-click, and a "Remove This Object" and bye-bye to blinky tag.

    Noooooo, don't. Look at it! ;)

  • Anonymous Coward (unregistered) in reply to Dave
    Dave:
    The whole description is entirely too familiar.

    The whole coding style is entirely too familiar, I might add.

  • JugglingMushrooms (unregistered) in reply to Not me

    Seriously, we had some devs from a third party, who were contracted to do some work for us, tell us that we were not using our SCM correctly. Endless discussion ensued as to what the purpose of an SCM system was for, and why they were wrong. Needless to say, the third party will send some new devs who think once again, that we are doing it wrong, because we don't do things the way that they do.

    Firstly, when I use SCM, I want it to have something that will compile and build. If it has been used for versioning files that don't do either of these then don't come running to me when things break because you can't tell me why you broke them.

    Secondly, when you make fixes outside of the SCM and then expect them magically to migrate into the SCM when updating, but you don't provide the full set of changes, don't blame the SCM, blame you're own change tracking process.

    Thirdly, when you supply changes to code that should have been working in the first place, don't expect us to be happy at having to retro-fit those changes to code based on specs that you haven't looked at.

  • Konrads (unregistered) in reply to Martin

    A certain company I've forgotten the name had "Red bit wizard" and "Blue bit wizard" as their CTO/CEO (maybe in reverse order) titles. The company was ran by a couple of white beard hackers.

  • Konrads (unregistered) in reply to JugglingMushrooms

    Lord bless SCMs for having stuff like /trunk, /branch and /tag :)

  • s. (unregistered) in reply to MadKat
    MadKat:
    <blink seriously="why does any browser support this any more?!?!">Obnoxiously</blink>

    Fantastic.

    CAPTCHA - pirates Yaaaaar!

    No 'Blink' tag!

  • sam (unregistered) in reply to Matt
    Matt:
    Wait, what? I see nothing vaguely identifying of ActionScript
    _root and Feedback_txt.text gives it away. _root is the main movieclip and comparable to the document-object of the HTML-DOM, _txt is the recommended suffix for textfields and the .text property is equivalent to the value property of the HTML-DOM. It was fairly common to see this kind of code in the days of Actionscript 1. I've seen far worse Actionscript in my time, and I actually fail to see why this function shouldn't work.
  • jimjim (unregistered) in reply to sam
    sam:
    Matt:
    Wait, what? I see nothing vaguely identifying of ActionScript
    _root and Feedback_txt.text gives it away. _root is the main movieclip and comparable to the document-object of the HTML-DOM, _txt is the recommended suffix for textfields and the .text property is equivalent to the value property of the HTML-DOM. It was fairly common to see this kind of code in the days of Actionscript 1. I've seen far worse Actionscript in my time, and I actually fail to see why this function shouldn't work.

    What amaze me is this:

    _root["hit"+i]

    why not _root.hit[i] ...

  • (cs)

    ah, source control... if I hadn't installed Subversion on our server when a new developer arrived we'd be using the shout technique today. You know, when you open a file you shout so people don't touch it. Still, the best question I had was a miffed "so to merge conflicting versions I need to edit the conflicting parts line by line?!". Yes moron, it's source control, not magic. RTFM and get with the program.

  • (cs) in reply to blah
    blah:
    Fist!!!!!!!!!!! Wait....

    The real WTF is, the entire code block...

    Are people this insane really walking around?

    Upright? I figured Darwin would have done us a favor by now.

  • Cloak (unregistered) in reply to Island Usurper
    Island Usurper:
    I appreciate the "seriously" attribute on the blink tag.

    But what does Dan say when he hears, "No, you broke it"?

    Something like "That can't be..., Can't remember..., You logged on with my user..."

    Had this several times already. And mostly in the first few weeks when they can always say "but it always worked until you arrived...", of course, my ass. Without version control you look really stupid when the "senior" programmer tells this to your boss. The culprit's always someone else.

  • (cs) in reply to Opie
    Opie:

    That's what standards support means...Supporting ALL of them, whether you like it or not.

    It's not a standard element; it's a Netscapism. There's any number of ways to kill it though. "browser.blink_allowed = false" is probably simplest.
  • (cs) 
    javascript:document.getElementsByTagName("div")[10].parentNode.removeChild(document.getElementsByTagName("div")[10]);alert ("All Better");
  • (cs)

    You guys bitching about the blink are seriously in need of a sense of humor, if not a life. It says, "Obnoxiously Intrusive Interruption". It's tongue-in-cheek... a way of apologizing for nagging about the survey by deliberately overdoing it. And it's gone as soon as you scroll down the page.

    Are you running out of things to whine about?

  • (cs) in reply to FredSaw
    FredSaw:
    You guys bitching about the blink are seriously in need of a sense of humor, if not a life. It says, "Obnoxiously Intrusive Interruption". It's tongue-in-cheek... a way of apologizing for nagging about the survey by deliberately overdoing it. And it's gone as soon as you scroll down the page.

    Are you running out of things to whine about?

    It's even better than that. When you view source, the attribute of the blink tag is: seriously="why does any browser support this any more?!?!"

  • (cs) in reply to jimjim
    jimjim:
    What amaze me is this:

    _root["hit"+i]

    why not _root.hit[i] ...

    Those statements are not identical. If "i" is equal to 1, they evaluate to:

    _root.hit1 _root.hit[1]

    All you guys bashing ActionScript would love AS3, which is just as verbose and ass-clenchingly strict as Java. Personally, the only beef I have with AS2 is that it refuses to throw a runtime error when you try to call a nonexistent function.

  • jdubya (unregistered) in reply to jimjim
    jimjim:
    sam:
    Matt:
    Wait, what? I see nothing vaguely identifying of ActionScript
    _root and Feedback_txt.text gives it away. _root is the main movieclip and comparable to the document-object of the HTML-DOM, _txt is the recommended suffix for textfields and the .text property is equivalent to the value property of the HTML-DOM. It was fairly common to see this kind of code in the days of Actionscript 1. I've seen far worse Actionscript in my time, and I actually fail to see why this function shouldn't work.

    What amaze me is this:

    _root["hit"+i]

    why not _root.hit[i] ...

    Welcome to ActionScript. Because "hit" is not an array. It's a group of items on the stage named "hit1", "hit2", "hit3"...

    This function probably totally works. If lock() is undefined the brilliant runtime will just move on, because really who needs error handling?

    I've written far worse back in the day when you basically didn't have a choice.

  • jdubya (unregistered) in reply to Zylon
    Zylon:
    Those statements are not identical. If "i" is equal to 1, they evaluate to:

    _root.hit1 _root.hit[1]

    All you guys bashing ActionScript would love AS3, which is just as verbose and ass-clenchingly strict as Java. Personally, the only beef I have with AS2 is that it refuses to throw a runtime error when you try to call a nonexistent function.

    There are things about AS3 that are still not cool. You can still reference properties with [" "] array like syntax which is annoying when debugging. Finally having a real debugger and a mostly type checking compiler is a big improvement.

  • (cs) in reply to jdubya
    jdubya:
    There are things about AS3 that are still not cool. You can still reference properties with [" "] array like syntax which is annoying when debugging.
    And if they removed that ability, how the smeg would you address bunches of objects with names like "foo1", "foo2", foo3", etc?
  • (cs)

    I like the "theTally". I believe that if you need to prefix a variable with "the", "my" or "current" that there's something wrong with your code.

    "theTally" could easily be just "tally". "CurrentProject" could easily be "Project", etc.

  • (cs) in reply to jdubya

    Don't forget the FAR more robust delegate and event model.

  • Swiet and Seksy (unregistered) in reply to Soviut
    Soviut:
    "theTally" could easily be just "tally". "CurrentProject" could easily be "Project", etc.

    But if I don't give my classes names like "MyIntContainer", how is anybody supposed to know who wrote it?

  • T.T. (unregistered)

    Gosh I so hate scripted languages ... Seeing all comments about AS makes me want to puke.

    CATPCHA: waffles... (I live in BE, and absolutely hate em)

  • ArrogantBastard (unregistered) in reply to Thomas
    Thomas:
    Lol, nice tittle. :-P

    Tittle? Is that a small tit?

    Mike :)

  • Gabriel (unregistered) in reply to ArrogantBastard
    ArrogantBastard:
    Thomas:
    Lol, nice tittle. :-P

    Tittle? Is that a small tit?

    Mike :)

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tittle

    A tittle is the dot on an 'i' or 'j'. =)

  • Blargle (unregistered)

    Why was anyone even looking at the source of the blink tag, anyway?

  • Cowbert (unregistered)

    Someone defeated the captcha!

  • Lorcan (unregistered) in reply to T.T.
    T.T.:
    Gosh I so hate scripted languages ... Seeing all comments about AS makes me want to puke.

    CATPCHA: waffles... (I live in BE, and absolutely hate em)

    Anything about AS or Flash makes me want to puke - there are many sites I won't visit now because of Flash-based ads - what a way to piss off visitors to your site. The only better way would be to have your site crash the users system on every visit...

  • Mikko (unregistered) in reply to ArrogantBastard
    ArrogantBastard:
    Thomas:
    Lol, nice tittle. :-P

    Tittle? Is that a small tit?

    Mike :)

    Nothing wrong with small tits - they taste just as good as big ones...

  • mequestrufen (unregistered) in reply to Everett
    Everett:
    Strider:
    TRWTF is that Trevor is still working there...?

    Trevor is actively seeking new employment.

    maybe Trevor works for WorseThanFailure as the compartmentalized submitting service oriented architecture engineer for WTF sending. With this guy the site will have code SOD for years.

  • (cs)

    One of the people on my team at work (great guy, btw) has the title "Information Engineer." We're still not sure if that means he engineers solutions that deal with information or if he makes up (mis)information.

  • Anonanon (unregistered) in reply to Zylon
    Zylon:
    jdubya:
    There are things about AS3 that are still not cool. You can still reference properties with [" "] array like syntax which is annoying when debugging.
    And if they removed that ability, how the smeg would you address bunches of objects with names like "foo1", "foo2", foo3", etc?

    Hehe, smeg.

  • KattMan (unregistered) in reply to Soviut
    Soviut:
    I like the "theTally". I believe that if you need to prefix a variable with "the", "my" or "current" that there's something wrong with your code.

    "theTally" could easily be just "tally". "CurrentProject" could easily be "Project", etc.

    Because CurrentProject could mean the one you are currently working with when you have a collection of projects and you just cloned to another variable to pass back a single project rather than a collection. Since this is valid, then there is no reason to argue semantics when you replace "current" with "the".

    Of course arbitrarily naming your variables "currentAnything" outside of this context is pretty silly.

  • Paula's Boyfriend (unregistered) in reply to Soviut
    Soviut:
    I like the "theTally". I believe that if you need to prefix a variable with "the", "my" or "current" that there's something wrong with your code.

    "theTally" could easily be just "tally". "CurrentProject" could easily be "Project", etc.

    Dude.... No. Sure, i agree with "the", if you have to use "the" as a prefix you havn't encapsulated enough, etc, but prefixes like "current" are completely reasonable.

    Say you need to compare the current project with the previous one in a given function. whatcha gonna do then, have project1 and project2? Nice WTF there mate.

    Or say you have a pointer to an item in a linked list that iterates over it. its less ambiguous to have currentItem than it is to have item. (or you could have currentPointedAtItemBrillant ;) )

    Worded prefixes are good form, as long as they are used to clarify a variable's meaning.

  • hippy (unregistered)

    Siteworx?

  • oPlaco (unregistered) in reply to Matt

    Must have been written for AS1.

    Found this on Adobe Flash Docs:

    <> (inequality) Deprecated since Flash Player 5. This operator has been deprecated. Adobe recommends that you use the != (inequality) operator.

    add (concatenation (strings)) Deprecated since Flash Player 5. Adobe recommends that you use the add (+) operator when creating content for Flash Player 5 or later. This operator is not supported in Flash Player 8 or later.

    and (logical AND) Deprecated since Flash Player 5. Adobe recommends that you use the logical AND (&&) operator.

    eq (equality (strings)) Deprecated since Flash Player 5. This operator was deprecated in favor of the == (equality) operator.

    ge (greater than or equal to (strings)) Deprecated since Flash Player 5. This operator was deprecated in favor of the >= (greater than or equal to) operator.

    gt (greater than (strings)) Deprecated since Flash Player 5. This operator was deprecated in favor of the > (greater than) operator.

    le (less than or equal to (strings)) Deprecated since Flash Player 5. This operator was deprecated in Flash 5 in favor of the <= (less than or equal to) operator.

    lt (less than (strings)) Deprecated since Flash Player 5. This operator was deprecated in favor of the < (less than) operator.

    ne (not equal (strings)) Deprecated since Flash Player 5. This operator was deprecated in favor of the != (inequality) operator.

    not (logical NOT) Deprecated since Flash Player 5. This operator was deprecated in favor of the! (logical NOT) operator.

    or (logical OR) Deprecated since Flash Player 5. This operator was deprecated in favor of the || (logical OR) operator.

  • Anonymous (unregistered)

    I'm not a big fan of bad code but as said earlier, flash actionscript tends to lead you to that direction. Also worth noting is that most flash developers have no programming skills and are basically animators, since the software originally was meant for animations and the timeline still plays a major role in normal development. Most flash "projects" are quick few day dashes which only aim is to function with not that much value put on reusability. Flash ActionScript 3 has way stricter limits btw.

Leave a comment on “Reverse Cycle-ogy”

Log In or post as a guest

Replying to comment #:

Log Out

« Return to Article