• faceless_tech (unregistered)

    ahhh good old Y2K... if in doubt, write another exception.

  • Dmitri (unregistered)

    fixed apocalypse

    Does it mean 'apocalypse would never happen' or 'apocalypse will certainly happen'?

  • ParkinT (cs)

    It is Y2B - when the Sun goes Supernova.

  • Dlareg (unregistered) in reply to ParkinT

    Our sun will for all probability never go super nova.. Not enough Mass... Unless all cristians suddenly decide to go to church.

  • cdosrun (cs) in reply to Dmitri
    Dmitri:
    > fixed apocalypse

    Does it mean 'apocalypse would never happen' or 'apocalypse will certainly happen'?

    Apocalypse would have happened in a non-compliant manner.

  • shinobu (cs)

    That's exactly why I would never ever go to work at any place where I've been an intern.

  • pingmaster (unregistered) in reply to shinobu
    shinobu:
    That's exactly why I would never ever go to work at any place where I've been an intern.
    why not? just make sure your get a new username in sourcesafe, then you can look like the hero fixing all your bugs and blaming them on 'some intern'
  • .peter (unregistered)

    Jörg ... German?!

    Anyways: Tt always gives me the creeps (is that the right word?!) to read my code from a decade ago. It feels like someone else wrote it, but still I am cursing at my own stupidity.

    Plus, everytime i do read my stuff from the 90s, i know that back than I would never have thought that stuff would be in use that long. Seriously: Only very few programmers think in terms of decades when they write their stuff. Then again: Maybe thats part of the problem, right?

  • Quango (cs)

    Apocalypse Not Found Error Abort, Retry, Fail ?

  • snoofle (cs)

    Things you don't think you'll have for decades, but sometimes do...

    1. Code
    2. Wife
    3. Children
  • hatterson (cs) in reply to .peter
    .peter:
    Jörg ... German?!

    Anyways: Tt always gives me the creeps (is that the right word?!) to read my code from a decade ago. It feels like someone else wrote it, but still I am cursing at my own stupidity.

    Plus, everytime i do read my stuff from the 90s, i know that back than I would never have thought that stuff would be in use that long. Seriously: Only very few programmers think in terms of decades when they write their stuff. Then again: Maybe thats part of the problem, right?

    More than once I've had the misfortune of updating stuff I wrote in school. Most of it being code that really should have never existed.

    Usually there's a thought process along the lines of: "holy crap this person was retarded, I'm glad I wasn't this terrible" checks author tags, notices self facepalm

    Also: yes that is a major problem with coding practices. The programmer writes stuff thinking "oh it'll only be around for a couple years". Then 15 years down the road 4 other maintenance programmers are borderline suicidal because they hate their lives so much from having to fix the crap that's still kicking around

  • Not a suspect in any current investigation (unregistered) in reply to shinobu
    shinobu:
    That's exactly why I would never ever go to work at any place where I've been an intern.
    Exactly. That's like gardening where you buried the bodies.
  • mrprogguy (cs) in reply to faceless_tech

    Why 2010? Agreed. Everyone knows the world ends in 2012 anyway.

  • Bernie (unregistered) in reply to Dmitri
    Dmitri:
    > fixed apocalypse

    Does it mean 'apocalypse would never happen' or 'apocalypse will certainly happen'?

    Read the article more closely; the apocalypse already happened. Jörg was nice enough to uninstall all of the crapware that came with the apocalypse.

  • trev (unregistered) in reply to .peter
    .peter:
    Jörg ... German?!
    No, Swedish.
  • Satanicpuppy (cs)

    Hahahaha!

    I love the WTFs that you cuss and scream about that turn out to be your own code! What idiot wrote this? Oh. Right.

    Mind you, 12 years is a long time, but hard-coded dates are never a good idea.

  • valerion (cs)

    So did he actually fix it, or just change the date to 2020 because, y'know, that'll be long enough. There's just no way they'll still be using it then. Definately.

  • Protector one (unregistered)

    It's like finding out your innocent little chess bot has evolved into SkyNet.

  • random_garbage (cs)

    Am I the only one who thinks that the logic "If we're still fixing Y2K bugs in 2010, something went horribly wrong" is perfectly sensible?

    The problem was that the application was used for something else, which it wasn't designed for... There was a sanity check in the initial application ("we can't set implementation too far into the future") which wasn't translated when the application changed purpose.

    I've frequently written applications which checked that a person's age when entered into the system is over 18... Now, the same application (contact management & scheduling) could be used for buildings, but building completion dates can be as recent as today, or even in the future... When changing the purpose of an application, you have to change the sanity checks.

  • lolwtf (cs)

    TRWTF is the "fixed bugs" comment. That doesn't explain anything. lern2comment n00b

  • Kermos (cs) in reply to lolwtf
    lolwtf:
    TRWTF is the "fixed bugs" comment. That doesn't explain anything. lern2comment n00b

    Hey it beats no comments at all, which in that case could very well mean "added bugs".

  • morry (unregistered)

    Yes it did happen. There was lots of running. Blood everywhere. Mel Gibson directed.

  • Hatshepsut (cs) in reply to Kermos
    Kermos:
    lolwtf:
    TRWTF is the "fixed bugs" comment. That doesn't explain anything. lern2comment n00b

    Hey it beats no comments at all, which in that case could very well mean "added bugs".

    But "fixed bugs" usually does mean "added bugs".

  • Smyle (unregistered)

    I'm just wondering why Miley Cyrus is coding for your company?

  • Anonymous (unregistered) in reply to lolwtf
    lolwtf:
    TRWTF is the "fixed bugs" comment. That doesn't explain anything. lern2comment n00b
    Judging from the maturity of your comment, Jörg was coding when you were still in diapers. lern2growthefuckupyou4channobody.
  • m0ffx (cs)

    The irony is that when Jorgs originally wrote the program, he made the SAME ERROR that he was writing software to help fix! (Assuming software won't be used in the distant future.)

    inb4 that's not what irony means

  • rmz (unregistered) in reply to valerion
    valerion:
    So did he actually fix it, or just change the date to 2020 because, y'know, that'll be long enough. There's just no way they'll still be using it then. Definately.
    He could change it to 2050 -- at least by that point he won't be working there anymore. :)
  • kastein (cs) in reply to rmz
    rmz:
    valerion:
    So did he actually fix it, or just change the date to 2020 because, y'know, that'll be long enough. There's just no way they'll still be using it then. Definately.
    He could change it to 2050 -- at least by that point he won't be working there anymore. :)
    Just for good measure he should also dynamically compute the string and the date the message shows up on so that they cannot be found with a simple search. If you're going to leave a trap for someone for no reason, make sure it's a really good one :)
  • Charles400 (cs)

    The DOW is below 7,000 right now. That's apocalyptic enough for me.

  • someguy (unregistered) in reply to Dmitri

    that's always a problem I have with reading the summary in a changelog. "So, you made this happen, or you made this not-happen?"

    There's several ways of thinking on this:

    • Always write to "what this makes it do now". eg: "Sam's birthday is on the 12th". Problem with this: Bug tracker probably already has something that says "Sam's birthday is on the 11th" to refer to the error-condition.
    • Always write to "what was wrong". eg: "Fixes: Sam's birthday is on the 11th". Problem with this: doesn't tell you what was done to fix it, doesn't actually describe any part of the change.
    • Always write to "present tense", ie: what the change is doing. eg: "change Sam's birthday from 11th to 12th". Problem with this: doesn't at all tell you why.
    • Just link to the bug id. eg: "Fixes: #203921, Sam's birthday is on the 11th". Problem with this: Same as the second case, really. And forces you to go somewhere else for an explanation. And usually doesn't bother describing the resolution. And bug trackers change, I've had to deal with manually importing and changing references to issue numbers before. There will always be stray numbers.

    Has anyone worked out a solution to this which doesn't blow?

  • Zapp Brannigan (unregistered) in reply to Not a suspect in any current investigation
    Not a suspect in any current investigation:
    shinobu:
    That's exactly why I would never ever go to work at any place where I've been an intern.
    Exactly. That's like gardening where you buried the bodies.
    Do you know how to get blood stains out of a clown suit?
  • Channel6 (cs) in reply to Charles400

    So the apocalypse occurred pre-1997 then?

  • Channel6 (cs) in reply to Charles400
    Charles400:
    The DOW is below 7,000 right now. That's apocalyptic enough for me.

    So the apocalypse occurred pre-1997 then?

  • campkev (cs) in reply to m0ffx
    m0ffx:
    The irony is that when Jorgs originally wrote the program, he made the SAME ERROR that he was writing software to help fix! (Assuming software won't be used in the distant future.)

    inb4 that's not what irony means

    um, yes it is.

  • Erzengel (cs) in reply to .peter
    .peter:
    it always gives me the creeps (is that the right word?!) to read my code from a decade ago. It feels like someone else wrote it, but still I am cursing at my own stupidity.

    I hate when I look back at code from school and think, "No, no, why am I doing that?" (Funny how I'm thinking in present tense as I'm reading it...) We live, we do stupid stuff, we learn. It's only a problem when you don't do the last action.

  • abstract protected synchronized final void longSignature() (unregistered) in reply to campkev
    campkev:
    m0ffx:
    The irony is that when Jorgs originally wrote the program, he made the SAME ERROR that he was writing software to help fix! (Assuming software won't be used in the distant future.)

    inb4 that's not what irony means

    um, yes it is.

    Irony(adj): Crisp, wrinkle-free. (Say, your shirt looks all irony today!)

    Reminds me of that Allanis Morisette song 'isn't it ironic'. The irony there is the song is more about bad luck and bad planning than it is about irony.

    PS., what's this about 'inb4'? Did inb4's comment vanish?

  • Jay (unregistered) in reply to Erzengel
    Erzengel:
    .peter:
    it always gives me the creeps (is that the right word?!) to read my code from a decade ago. It feels like someone else wrote it, but still I am cursing at my own stupidity.

    I hate when I look back at code from school and think, "No, no, why am I doing that?" (Funny how I'm thinking in present tense as I'm reading it...) We live, we do stupid stuff, we learn. It's only a problem when you don't do the last action.

    True. Surely the really sad thing would be if you looked at some bad code that you wrote twenty years ago and said, "Hey, what brillant code I wrote back then! Isn't it great that I haven't found a need to learn anything new in 20 years."

  • Sa (unregistered) in reply to Channel6
    Channel6:
    Charles400:
    The DOW is below 7,000 right now. That's apocalyptic enough for me.

    So the apocalypse occurred pre-1997 then?

    Not just pre-1997. The whole damn decade was a smoking ruin. Or maybe... No wait. Maybe I'm thinking of the 80's instead.

  • Bill Waite (unregistered) in reply to abstract protected synchronized final void longSignature()
    Comment held for moderation.
  • Jay (unregistered) in reply to someguy
    someguy:
    that's always a problem I have with reading the summary in a changelog. "So, you made this happen, or you made this not-happen?"

    There's several ways of thinking on this:

    • Always write to "what this makes it do now". eg: "Sam's birthday is on the 12th". Problem with this: Bug tracker probably already has something that says "Sam's birthday is on the 11th" to refer to the error-condition.
    • Always write to "what was wrong". eg: "Fixes: Sam's birthday is on the 11th". Problem with this: doesn't tell you what was done to fix it, doesn't actually describe any part of the change.
    • Always write to "present tense", ie: what the change is doing. eg: "change Sam's birthday from 11th to 12th". Problem with this: doesn't at all tell you why.
    • Just link to the bug id. eg: "Fixes: #203921, Sam's birthday is on the 11th". Problem with this: Same as the second case, really. And forces you to go somewhere else for an explanation. And usually doesn't bother describing the resolution. And bug trackers change, I've had to deal with manually importing and changing references to issue numbers before. There will always be stray numbers.

    Has anyone worked out a solution to this which doesn't blow?

    Personally, I opt for change log entries that describe the change, like "Changed sales tax calculation to take discounts into account" or "Fixed buffer overrun problem in FTP send". Which sadly is a rather moot point in my present environment, as we do all our working updates to a temporary branch, which then gets dragged back into the production branch, usually combined with a bunch of other temporary branches, and with a generic change log entry like "Release 15".

  • campkev (cs) in reply to abstract protected synchronized final void longSignature()
    abstract protected synchronized final void longSignature():

    Reminds me of that Allanis Morisette song 'isn't it ironic'. The irony there is the song is more about bad luck and bad planning than it is about irony.

    The song makes a lot more sense if you change every instance of "ironic" to "shitty". I always wondered if that wasn't the original title of the song and her label forced her to changed it.

  • GregP (unregistered)

    I thought 2012 was the new Apocalypse.

  • Americium (unregistered) in reply to GregP
    GregP:
    I thought 2012 was the new Apocalypse.

    I think 2012 is the Mayan Apocalypse.

  • campkev (cs) in reply to Americium
    Americium:
    GregP:
    I thought 2012 was the new Apocalypse.

    I think 2012 is the Mayan Apocalypse.

    I think 2012 is the non-existent BS Apocalypse

  • IV (unregistered) in reply to campkev
    campkev:
    m0ffx:

    inb4 that's not what irony means

    um, yes it is.

    That's because he got in before the date check returned a null definition for irony. You know, January of next year. His story is ironic now, but won't be when there is no definition for irony. That's why he said "inb4".

  • iToad (unregistered)

    Is this Visual Basic? If so, somebody will probably be still supporting this thing in 3010.

  • .peter (unregistered) in reply to Jay
    Jay:
    Erzengel:
    .peter:
    it always gives me the creeps (is that the right word?!) to read my code from a decade ago. It feels like someone else wrote it, but still I am cursing at my own stupidity.

    I hate when I look back at code from school and think, "No, no, why am I doing that?" (Funny how I'm thinking in present tense as I'm reading it...) We live, we do stupid stuff, we learn. It's only a problem when you don't do the last action.

    True. Surely the really sad thing would be if you looked at some bad code that you wrote twenty years ago and said, "Hey, what brillant code I wrote back then! Isn't it great that I haven't found a need to learn anything new in 20 years."

    True, and you could differentiate 3 types of programmers on how they progress over time:

    Type 1: The idiot: usually works at Universities, been there for 20 years, thinks CSS has something to do with Crimes Scenes, and never really fell for that modern PHP und SQL stuff those kids talk about all the time

    Type 2: The autodidactical kind: Also works at Universities, never actually learned something in school, but rather learned on the job ... He is somewhat knowledgable, is even aware of what he is unable to grasp, thus is usually scared of anything involving recursive formulas and the likes.

    Type 3: The professional: Would never work at a University. The only one who actually knows what he is doing.

    There are vast numbers of type 1 programmers, and not nearly enough type 3 programmers.

    CAPTCHA: ACSI ... Father of ASCII and Hex

  • J (unregistered) in reply to Hatshepsut
    Hatshepsut:
    Kermos:
    lolwtf:
    TRWTF is the "fixed bugs" comment. That doesn't explain anything. lern2comment n00b

    Hey it beats no comments at all, which in that case could very well mean "added bugs".

    But "fixed bugs" usually does mean "added bugs".

    I particularly enjoy referring to the process of writing code as enbugging. That way, the process of debugging is removing what you put in there in the first place.

  • Liam C (unregistered)

    I love the revision comment "fixed apocalypse"

  • RBoy (unregistered) in reply to someguy
    someguy:
    Has anyone worked out a solution to this which doesn't blow?

    Not one that I'd be willing to buy dinner for...

    (rimshot)

    {Captcha is going back to basics, or at least trying... 'acsi'... so close captcha robot, so close indeed)

Leave a comment on “The Apocalypse Must Have Occurred?!”

Log In or post as a guest

Replying to comment #:

« Return to Article