• (nodebb) 
    await (function () {
    return new Promise((resolve, reject) => { return first() } }

    Addendum 2026-04-16 07:46: return frist() dammit

  • Rob (unregistered)

    As a general rule, you don't construct promises directly, you let asynchronous code generate them and pass them around (or await them). It's not a thing you never do, but it's certainly suspicious.

    Unless the asynchronous behavior comes from callbacks, and you resolve or reject the promise based on callback results.

  • AzureDiamond (unregistered)

    i dont get how these contract agencies still get customers. your average 15 year old vibe coder with zero experience would def come up with something better, or at least less offensively bad.

  • Argle (unregistered)

    I might put in the whole tale sometime, but I took over a project where the lowest bidder undercut the second lowest by 2/3. After digging into the mess, the contractors had the bright idea to manage programmers from India, only to find that those costs had escalated to 3 times the second-lowest bid.

    "Is that a real Rolex?"

    "It better be, or I got ripped off for $200."

  • OldCoder (unregistered)

    My guess is that the whole thing didn't work and they had no idea why, so they shotgun-fired these all over the code to see if that helped.

    I dread to think what they did when this abomination didn't work either.

  • (nodebb) in reply to jeremypnet

    Addendum 2026-04-16 07:46: return frist() dammit

    Kudos for excellent code review!!

  • Chris Hennick (github) in reply to AzureDiamond

    I'm guessing a lot of the development was done while coding genAI was still primitive, and that it was too brittle to meaningfully refactor by the time "modern" genAI got to it. GenAI still doesn't seem to be very good at major refactors/rewrites, at least when relying on implementation-as-spec rather than an up-to-date requirements document.

  • (author) in reply to Chris Hennick

    I've seen VS Code try and use AI as a refactoring tool, instead of traditional refactoring. I hate it, and it's worse than traditional refactoring by far. "Extract this code to a method". It deletes the code, replaces it with a method call, but then doesn't generate a method containing the original code.

  • (nodebb) in reply to Remy Porter

    Copilot can get confused sometimes, that's why you watch over its shoulder, but refactoring is something it seems ok at.

  • Richard (unregistered) in reply to jeremypnet

    could someone please explain this first/frist second/secnod nonsense to me?

  • Hanzito (unregistered) in reply to Richard

    It's an in-joke. I don't know where or how it started, but there used to be habit of replying "first" on bulletin boards and the like. So it's a pun on that, and also on typos. It dates back to at least 2010: https://thedailywtf.com/articles/Security-Frist!

  • enkorvaks (unregistered) in reply to Hanzito

    It might only have been 2010 on this site, but Slashdot (at least) had people doing this in 2004. I think that they were (somewhat) serious, in that "I can show I am the biggest fan, by showing I saw this article before anyone else", but most other people didn't care (and down-voted the post to oblivion). In their mad rush for temporary glory, they misspelled "first" as "frist", often "frist psot" (although that may have been deliberate, and mocking those who were serious). Here, as mentioned, it is a joke, which is continued with "secnod" and "thrid" (although I don't think I've seen it go higher).

  • Mike5 (unregistered)

    A think this is a brillant opportunity to educate the new generation...

  • (nodebb) in reply to enkorvaks

    And for an added bit of fun, sometimes people would reference Bill Frist, who was a U.S. senator at the time.

    Addendum 2026-04-20 09:20: Specifically, the Tennessee part of the U.S.

Leave a comment on “We'll Hire Better Contractors Next Time, We Promise”

Log In or post as a guest

Replying to comment #:

Log Out

« Return to Article