• Ryan Farley (unregistered)

    Haha. That was a good one. Haha. That was a good one.

  • Jeff (unregistered)

    You can say that again.

  • Frijoles (unregistered)

    Wonder if it was originally different code and they changed it without looking at the old code (either because they feared it or were in a hurry).

  • Algol Fan (unregistered)

    Looks like classic cut'n'paste development.

  • Marten Veldthuis (unregistered)

    Y'know, if they'd use a loop, they would be able to easily enhance the certainty of that by running the code at least 3 times.

  • Simon (unregistered)

    Your supposed to change the pasted bit !!! ha ha ha

  • flash (unregistered)

    I wonder how many other times they do this... I bet this is lightning fast!!

  • MrGenericComment (unregistered)

    Spec: "Ensure all values are set by setting all values. Twice."

  • TheF0o1 (unregistered)

    If this were cut-and-paste code, then why is the order of assignments swapped? Maybe because this block was written in two different places and copied twice here.

    This reminds me a lot of DNA as we understand it. There are lots of places with similar or identical sequences, i.e., a whole lot of redundancy with occaisional variations. And, with DNA there are a lot of cut-and-paste operations too, and they seem to work very well. That's the premise behind evolutionary algorithms. Is this code snippet just the result of genetic programming?

  • Alex Papadimoulis (unregistered)

    TheF0o1, these statements were side-by-side.

  • David (unregistered)

    N-Tier variable assignment

  • Matthew W. Jackson (unregistered)

    Personally, when setting a value, I'd use the following (in C-style code for simplicity):

    do { value = newValue; } while(value != newValue);

    This will ensure that the loop runs as many times as needed to set the actual value.

  • Wes (unregistered)

    I don't get it...

  • Grant (unregistered)

    That shit's like Nas, yo.

  • Miles Archer (unregistered)

    Notice that this isn't VB code.

  • icelava (unregistered)

    If there were more than just @NonPropLev and @BOMLevel to check, then yes it may have a third and fourth block.

  • Hannes (unregistered)

    Copy paste with a twist :-)

  • Bernhard (unregistered)

    Look how many lines of code there are in our solution. It must be complicated and very good.

  • Peter (unregistered)

    Greetings from the Department of Redundancy Department. And "hello to you" as well.

Leave a comment on “Today's Late Post plus a Post that's late”

Log In or post as a guest

Replying to comment #:

Log Out

« Return to Article