• (cs) in reply to Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward:
    This isn't so much of a WTF when you realize that in the non-anonymized version of this story, the female programmer's name was "Func". It was really all just coincidence.
    LOL, feature this.
  • Big deal (unregistered) in reply to u2892

    Inbreastrode

  • (cs)

    Stalking (or as I call it: loving too much) via code? Genius!

  • Larry Lard (unregistered) in reply to John
    John:
    dkf:
    Why would you use a nullable with a reference type? They're natively able to be null anyway. This smells of TRealWTF...
    Someone has to state the obvuious and hell, it mihgt as well be me. System.Double is a VALUE type. That's why it has a nullable counterpart.

    Pity the poor Java programmers. For them there is a difference between double and Double, and the latter is a reference type. I don't know how they cope.

  • slackhead (unregistered)

    You're all wrong! Rachelle is the name of his mother.

  • Carolyn (unregistered) in reply to CAPTCHA: eros

    No, grownups are responsible for their own naughty thoughts.

  • Andrew (unregistered) in reply to Desperate
    Desperate:
    Public GotaCrushOnRachel()

    Reminds me of when I was 5 and fancied my sisters friend.

    try GetaGirlfriend (random_string, listen_time, empathise)

    Do While

    WantingRelationship=True

    Loop

    GotaCrushOnRachel() must be declared private.

  • Carolyn (unregistered) in reply to Chip

    I'm not your love.

  • Sven (unregistered) in reply to John
    John:
    dkf:
    Why would you use a nullable with a reference type? They're natively able to be null anyway. This smells of TRealWTF...
    Someone has to state the obvuious and hell, it mihgt as well be me. System.Double is a VALUE type. That's why it has a nullable counterpart.
    True, and as someone pointed out, nullable types are implemented using Nullable<T>, which is defined as: public struct Nullable<T> where T : struct, new()

    For those not familiar with C#, that puts a constraint on the generic type that says that T must be a value type (and have a parameterless public constructor, but that's not relevant here). So if you try to use Nullable<T> with a reference type (that also goes when using the ? syntax), it will not compile.

  • InMyDecline (unregistered)

    I've never met a female programmer that didn't understand and enjoy the proper use of strongly typed pointers. Looks like this guy should've given her a few lessons and moved on...

  • AdT (unregistered) 
    private drool Rachelle(string tanga)
{
    DecorateInterior();
    InviteVisitor();
    ObtainThreadHandle();
    UnwrapObject();
    TouchStructure();
    Unzip();
    InsertStub();
    Push();
    InjectChildData();
    Pull();
    Sleep(8 * 3600);
}
  • Anonymous (unregistered) in reply to dkf
    dkf:
    Why would you use a nullable with a reference type? They're natively able to be null anyway. This smells of TRealWTF...
    This is not Java - it is the .NET Framework, in which Double in a value type. The dead giveaway is the static Convert class which doesn't exist in Java. However, the coding style is very Java oriented (method names, bracing, all follow the Java guidelines). I'm guessing that this shop had fairly recently moved over from Java to .NET, or they employ a lot of Java coders who can't be bothered to revise their coding style.
  • EitherOr (unregistered)

    He had the sense to demote himself so he wouldn't be her manager, but then no followthrough.

  • Rachelle (unregistered)

    Seriously guys, im flattered.

    while(female && goodLooking) rinseIt++;

  • (cs)

    /me frowns Tamm: I'm a girl, I'm in IT, and I consider myself a decent programmer (better than a whole lot I've seen) and I'm told I'm beautiful almost every day. Guy's like Titus are the reason that girls like me are such a rare minority!

    Love the fact that this operation had to be put into a function, makes me wonder.. how many times was it used?

  • noname (unregistered) in reply to Zé
    Zé:
    Now, that's something I've never seen. A hot AND competent programmer? Must be a hoax.

    Not so. I worked with one. She was also the Boss's daughter.

  • Ed (unregistered) in reply to Carolyn
    Carolyn:
    What should have been the todo: Stop being a horny creep and act like a grown up man who can interact with women like an adult.

    You haven't met any programmers recently, have you?

  • Pinn (unregistered) in reply to and Weeeeeeee!

    b.Dispose();

  • Asiago Chow (unregistered)

    So the WTF is that he didn't ask her out?

    Tway I look at it a real WTF would be if he constantly hit on her as her boss. Not unusual, not cool. Another WTF would be if he tried to pull a soap opera: really come on strong with the groping and when she complained "your my boss", fire her on the spot and keep groping. I can think of a number of WTFy things he could have done.

    This seems kinda reasonable actually. He recognized that he had a problem that could influence his performance as her boss. Rather than punish her for his problem he shifted himself out of the way. Yeah, it sucks that he couldn't deal with his infatuation in a better way than using her name for functions... but maybe one or both of them were married.

    It sucks to be human sometimes.

  • diaphanein (unregistered) in reply to tamm
    tamm:
    /me frowns Tamm: I'm a girl, I'm in IT, and I consider myself a decent programmer (better than a whole lot I've seen) and I'm told I'm beautiful almost every day. Guy's like Titus are the reason that girls like me are such a rare minority!

    Love the fact that this operation had to be put into a function, makes me wonder.. how many times was it used?

    Probably once. Couldn't get past his eyes rolling to the back of his head after he'd coded it.

  • modo (unregistered) in reply to CAPTCHA: eros
    CAPTCHA: eros:
    100% fairy tale. Everyone knows beautiful programmers don't exist in reality.
    Yes I do.
  • Shoot me (unregistered) in reply to CAPTCHA: eros
    CAPTCHA: eros:
    100% fairy tale. Everyone knows beautiful programmers don't exist in reality.

    Agreed!

  • Bob (unregistered) in reply to atrigent
    atrigent:
    Pics or GTFO!
    I for one welcom our new 4chan overlords
  • (cs)

    it works both ways you know - hot MEN are a rarity in IT also sigh

  • iToad (unregistered) in reply to Ed
    Ed:
    Carolyn:
    What should have been the todo: Stop being a horny creep and act like a grown up man who can interact with women like an adult.

    You haven't met any programmers recently, have you?

    The only reason that women actually get a restraining order against you, is to show that they really care.

    // !social_skills

  • SittingNextToRachelle (unregistered)

    trust me when i tell you. Rachelle is HOT. Likes tight outfits. And fills them well.

  • Gorfblot (unregistered) in reply to iToad
    iToad:
    Ed:
    Carolyn:
    What should have been the todo: Stop being a horny creep and act like a grown up man who can interact with women like an adult.

    You haven't met any programmers recently, have you?

    The only reason that women actually get a restraining order against you, is to show that they really care.

    // !social_skills

    It's called playing hard to get. This do this to see if you're really interested, or if it's just a crush.

  • (cs) in reply to SittingNextToRachelle
    SittingNextToRachelle:
    trust me when i tell you. Rachelle is HOT. Likes tight outfits. And fills them well.

    Flattery will get you everywhere... Alas, I dare not post a picture - Titus might be watching!!

  • Anonymous (unregistered) in reply to tamm
    tamm:
    /me frowns Tamm: I'm a girl, I'm in IT, and I consider myself a decent programmer (better than a whole lot I've seen) and I'm told I'm beautiful almost every day. Guy's like Titus are the reason that girls like me are such a rare minority!

    Love the fact that this operation had to be put into a function, makes me wonder.. how many times was it used?

    Sorry Tamm, pics or you don't exist. You may get told you're beautiful "almost every day" but believe me, it doesn't make it true. Why not? Well, I lie "almost every day" - it's just part of being a man.

  • (cs) in reply to shinobu
    shinobu:

    OMFG, that is the funniest thing I have ever seen. Who says that preconceptions are wrong?

  • SomeCoder (unregistered) in reply to Anonymous
    Anonymous:
    tamm:
    /me frowns Tamm: I'm a girl, I'm in IT, and I consider myself a decent programmer (better than a whole lot I've seen) and I'm told I'm beautiful almost every day. Guy's like Titus are the reason that girls like me are such a rare minority!

    Love the fact that this operation had to be put into a function, makes me wonder.. how many times was it used?

    Sorry Tamm, pics or you don't exist. You may get told you're beautiful "almost every day" but believe me, it doesn't make it true. Why not? Well, I lie "almost every day" - it's just part of being a man.

    Hey, we don't just need pics in that case. We'd need code samples too. She could be gorgeous but could barely code at all.

  • (cs)
    private Double? rachelle(string txt)
    At least he didn't start calling it as:

    Double penetration = rachelle("me and clone of Rachelle with strapon");

  • eddie pasterkak (unregistered) in reply to Ciph3r_

    giggle

  • (cs)

    This is all only slightly creepy...

  • (cs) in reply to elias

    I give you rachelle!

    [image]

    ...and her dog Toto. [image]

  • sam (unregistered) in reply to Jeff

    Shouldn't this return a bool?

    $her_answer = quit_obsessing_and_ask_her_out("hey do you want to get some coffee?");

    print $her_answer ? "yipee" : "that bitch";

  • (cs)

    // TODO: Post image from XKCD (http://xkcd.com/322/).

  • Shill (unregistered) in reply to Carolyn
    Carolyn:
    No, grownups are responsible for their own naughty thoughts.

    They are trolling you. Like in War Games, the only way to win is not to play the game.

  • SNF (unregistered) in reply to AdT
    AdT:
    private drool Rachelle(string tanga)
{
    [ snip ]
    ObtainThreadHandle();
    [ snip ]
}

    Informal poll. Upon reading the above line of code, how many people thought "thong" vs "tampon"?

    Inquiring minds...

  • AboutToFly (unregistered)

    So far in the article and comments, we've had people:

    • claiming that working with an attractive woman 'torments' male developers, and calling the woman 'something'
    • saying that she should not be offended by her co-worker's obsession with her
    • blaming the irresponsible behaviour of the male developer(s) on the woman who is the victim
    • when someone protests the idiocy of the above comments, acting as if she's the one at fault
    • calling someone 'love' as a diminutive
    • referring to stalking - a serious issue - as 'loving too much'
    • pretending to be Rachelle and acting flattered by all the harassment
    • making an idiotic joke about restraining orders, disrespecting the victims who actually need them and not because they want to 'show they really care'
    • continuing the above joke with a 'hard to get' comment
    • googling 'rachelle programmer' and joking about the unattractiveness of the images that come up
    • and, of course, insisting on seeing pictures to fantasize over, often at the same time claiming that female coders are not attractive, implying that the purpose of women is to be attractive to please men and that unattractive women are worthless, about 15 times.

    I know I shouldn't have expected better from Internet commenters, but I enjoy this site and the level of misogyny expressed here really disturbs me.

  • Dirk Diggler (unregistered) in reply to SomeCoder
    SomeCoder:
    Anonymous:
    tamm:
    /me frowns Tamm: I'm a girl, I'm in IT, and I consider myself a decent programmer (better than a whole lot I've seen) and I'm told I'm beautiful almost every day. Guy's like Titus are the reason that girls like me are such a rare minority!

    Love the fact that this operation had to be put into a function, makes me wonder.. how many times was it used?

    Sorry Tamm, pics or you don't exist. You may get told you're beautiful "almost every day" but believe me, it doesn't make it true. Why not? Well, I lie "almost every day" - it's just part of being a man.

    Hey, we don't just need pics in that case. We'd need code samples too. She could be gorgeous but could barely code at all.

    FWIW my mom thinks I'm handsome and I think I'm the best coder I know. Please send nekid pix and the codez.

  • m (unregistered) in reply to RiF

    It means it can store double value or null.

  • Christopher (unregistered)

    Wow, you're all doing a great job keeping the women out of IT with comments like these.

    Reference:

    [image]

    http://xkcd.com/322/

  • (cs) in reply to AboutToFly
    AboutToFly:
    So far in the article and comments, we've had people: - claiming that working with an attractive woman 'torments' male developers, and calling the woman 'something' - saying that she should not be offended by her co-worker's obsession with her - blaming the irresponsible behaviour of the male developer(s) on the woman who is the victim - when someone protests the idiocy of the above comments, acting as if she's the one at fault - calling someone 'love' as a diminutive - referring to stalking - a serious issue - as 'loving too much' - pretending to be Rachelle and acting flattered by all the harassment - making an idiotic joke about restraining orders, disrespecting the victims who actually need them and not because they want to 'show they really care' - continuing the above joke with a 'hard to get' comment - googling 'rachelle programmer' and joking about the unattractiveness of the images that come up - and, of course, insisting on seeing pictures to fantasize over, often at the same time claiming that female coders are not attractive, implying that the purpose of women is to be attractive to please men and that unattractive women are worthless, about 15 times.

    I know I shouldn't have expected better from Internet commenters, but I enjoy this site and the level of misogyny expressed here really disturbs me.

    Well, you've totally nailed the humorless feminist stereotype. I suggest you go take a course on humor or something.

    /ps. everything's funny. Every Thing

  • sf (unregistered) in reply to CAPTCHA: eros
    CAPTCHA: eros:
    100% fairy tale. Everyone knows beautiful programmers don't exist in reality.
    Worked with some, married one. </brag>
  • (cs) in reply to AdT
    AdT:
    private drool Rachelle(string tanga)
{
    DecorateInterior();
    InviteVisitor();
    ObtainThreadHandle();
    UnwrapObject();
    TouchStructure();
    Unzip();
    InsertStub();
    Push();
    InjectChildData();
    Pull();
    Sleep(8 * 3600);
}

    You forgot to return a drool!

    (I assume that's C# ("string" vs. "String" says it can't be Java, and no colon after private says it can't be C++); doesn't C# throw up if you don't return a value from a non-void function?)

  • PHB (unregistered) in reply to AboutToFly
    AboutToFly:
    So far in the article and comments, we've had people: - claiming that working with an attractive woman 'torments' male developers, and calling the woman 'something' - saying that she should not be offended by her co-worker's obsession with her - blaming the irresponsible behaviour of the male developer(s) on the woman who is the victim - when someone protests the idiocy of the above comments, acting as if she's the one at fault - calling someone 'love' as a diminutive - referring to stalking - a serious issue - as 'loving too much' - pretending to be Rachelle and acting flattered by all the harassment - making an idiotic joke about restraining orders, disrespecting the victims who actually need them and not because they want to 'show they really care' - continuing the above joke with a 'hard to get' comment - googling 'rachelle programmer' and joking about the unattractiveness of the images that come up - and, of course, insisting on seeing pictures to fantasize over, often at the same time claiming that female coders are not attractive, implying that the purpose of women is to be attractive to please men and that unattractive women are worthless, about 15 times.

    I know I shouldn't have expected better from Internet commenters, but I enjoy this site and the level of misogyny expressed here really disturbs me.

    I've been lurking this site for a long time and just wanted to quickly surface and say that my respect for many of the commenters here dropped significantly today.

    Over the years I've learned many things from these comments/conversations and I've often used them to get a glimpse of how coders and other random IT professionals 'think' when approaching a problem or situation.

    It is sad and surprising that the old stereotypes live on.

  • iMalc (unregistered) in reply to AdT

    You forgot the PenIsUp() and PenIsDown() functions!

  • (cs) in reply to PHB
    PHB:
    I've been lurking this site for a long time and just wanted to quickly surface and say that my respect for many of the commenters here dropped significantly today.

    Over the years I've learned many things from these comments/conversations and I've often used them to get a glimpse of how coders and other random IT professionals 'think' when approaching a problem or situation.

    It is sad and surprising that the old stereotypes live on.

    So sorry we don't fit your narrow brand of humor. TDWTF is sophomoric most of the time - what did you expect?

  • Curious (unregistered)

    Does Rachelle have a brilliant twin sister named Paula?

Leave a comment on “TODO: Better Name”

Log In or post as a guest

Replying to comment #:

Log Out

« Return to Article