• ray10k (unregistered)

    Most languages that I know of would complain loudly at the empty try block, so! Who wants to bet this project had over 1000 warnings? (also, obligatory "Simpsons did it")

  • someone (unregistered)

    Wondering if there's any real reason base.OnLoad(e) couldn't be tryed. tried?

  • registered (unregistered)

    I would like to try the frist nothing.

  • ray10k (unregistered) in reply to someone

    Expanding on Remy's assumption as to how this code came to be, it could be another buttenine rule. "If a function must call a function from the class it overloads, then the call must be the first thing that happens in the function."

  • bvs23bkv33 (unregistered) in reply to ray10k

    on my project cc -Wall >warning.log gives over 2 mb file

  • my name is missing (unregistered)

    Do. Or do not. There is no try - Yoda

  • Little Bobby Tables (unregistered) in reply to ray10k

    The word is "asinine" if you were trying for a seriously-past-its-sell-by-date joke.

  • ray10k (unregistered) in reply to Little Bobby Tables

    Yeah, an old one indeed. https://thedailywtf.com/articles/29-Just-Say-It

  • (nodebb) in reply to ray10k

    Someone is thinking this is a constructor, where the first statement must be the call to the parent's constructor, if you are going to use one at all, at least in .Net languages, like C# or VB.Net.

  • Altaree (unregistered)

    No comments. No unicorns. No rainbows. Remy, have you been hacked?

  • Kleyguerth (github)

    No easy reader version? Literally unreadable.

  • 33vkb32svb (unregistered)

    On my project, the build fails if either cppcheck or gcc -Wall -Wextra -pedantic finds anything. I still want to add the clang analyzer wrapper 'scan-build' to the process.

  • Bill T (unregistered)

    I'm still impressed by how much WTF is in the unreachable logging line. What all is going on under the hood for LoggingService? No, there were some things man was not meant to know...

  • Derf Skren (unregistered)

    No what drove them under was having their tabs set to 8 characters! :-O

  • (nodebb) in reply to Altaree

    There is nothing. Remy didn't even try.

  • Vilx- (unregistered)

    I have a much more mundane explanation for this - it's a blank template. When they make a new class, they use some sort of template that comes along with a basic skeleton like this. If there was something useful to do, then the person writing that code wouldn't forget the try/cath/log part. If there isn't anything... well, someone forgot or just didn't bother to clean up.

  • assurance (unregistered) in reply to ray10k

    My associated assistant assured me that no-such assinine class rule has been assembled.

  • (nodebb)

    The actual problem is that base.OnLoad(e) sometimes threw some exception, and the author of the derived class used to wonder why his code failed to catch it...

  • Anon (unregistered) in reply to Vilx-

    Then TRWTF would be the template logging unhandled exceptions in the OnLoad event instead of implementing it somewhere more global. And even worse - that it swallows the exception rather than re-throwing it.

  • Vilx- (unregistered) in reply to Anon

    True dat.

  • Chris (unregistered)

    Are we not going to discuss the string.Format("")?

  • Merlin (unregistered) in reply to Vilx-

    Nope, not a blank template. I dug deep in the version history (which presumably is a dump of an svn resulting in one folder per minor version)... The OnLoad was added like that long after the class existed.

  • David (unregistered) in reply to someone

    TRWTF is the anonymization:

    public partial class SomeProcessUserControl : SomeSlightlyDifferentProcessUserControl

    Apparently the editor doesn't even know that a more specific class is usually extending a more generic one but at the same time feels entitled to complain about other peoples code...

Leave a comment on “We Tried Nothing”

Log In or post as a guest

Replying to comment #:

« Return to Article