- Feature Articles
- CodeSOD
- Error'd
- Forums
-
Other Articles
- Random Article
- Other Series
- Alex's Soapbox
- Announcements
- Best of…
- Best of Email
- Best of the Sidebar
- Bring Your Own Code
- Coded Smorgasbord
- Mandatory Fun Day
- Off Topic
- Representative Line
- News Roundup
- Editor's Soapbox
- Software on the Rocks
- Souvenir Potpourri
- Sponsor Post
- Tales from the Interview
- The Daily WTF: Live
- Virtudyne
Admin
Thats what you call "dynamic engineering"
Admin
I have seen this. I almost landed the maintenance contract for an "dynamic" asp-site with more than 3000 almost similar static pages, minor differences only. I particularly liked the 3000 copies of the connection string, very testable.
Admin
The worst part is that a place this clueless isn't going to understand the reason why this is wrong and should be fixed to be properly written. In fact, judging from the many similar (not quite as bad though) places I've worked at, even mentioning why this is bad will put you on the chopping block.
Admin
.vb
triggered
Admin
TRWTF: dreamweaver
Admin
That's BRILLIANT!
Admin
I think you meant BRILLANT!
Admin
"static dynamic" pages are not always a fail. Auto generated static pages provide some capabilities that can not be readily achieved with true dynamic pages.
Admin
Go on...?
Admin
Why do you assume these are auto-generated?
Admin
They render faster when they're straight html and rendered/cached by a pure http server (insert your fav here), but these are aspx and have some vb includes - so I suspect this isn't one of those cases.
Admin
Even if you want the speed of static pages in a dynamic application, you can do that by pre-rendering your HTML from the templates once changes are made. Then you don't have to run a batch sed (or more likely, hand-edit) every file to make a style change.
Admin
Yeah, will if it is autogenerated it might not be such a crime, on the other hand the true WTFery might be in that code ... there's a couple of clues!
Admin
That genuinely made me laugh. I've seen some 'interesting' url rewriting done before in the name of SEO but I wasn't expecting that outcome
Admin
I've done something similar to this when needing a quick-and-dirty static version of an unneccessarily dynamic site (i.e. the "dynamic" content doesn't change a lot, typically simply templates and such). Basically just serving up a wget --mirror. But somehow I doubt that's the case here - and it's not a good idea for something serious regardless.