|
Nah, it's valid pseudo-pseudocode.
|
|
|
|
|
I can't see anything wrong with that code.
Attitudes like that stop people like me (Students from college) from becoming developers, because no-one wants a newbie. Catch 22.
Tom
|
|
|
|
|
Functionally the code would work. Just weird, when some smarty-pants with a 4-years information system B.-degree and some >=3-years 'experience' codes crap like that.
Imagine then, 4 out of 5 (internal) programmers at the company where i was emplyed, churned out crap like that, for a complex financial system.
Mind you, the lead programmer was creating such code himself.
I have, in my 9 years as developer came across countless exampless of coding horrors, which are created to show-off their 'skill'.
Tom Moore wrote: I can't see anything wrong with that code.
Attitudes like that stop people like me (Students from college) from becoming developers, because no-one wants a newbie. Catch 22.
met vriendelijke groet,
Michiel Erasmus
|
|
|
|
|
Ok, that's pretty scary.
-------------------------------
Carrier Bags - 21st Century Tumbleweed.
|
|
|
|
|
At least it probably wasn't copied and pasted from an example on a disk that came with a book.
|
|
|
|
|
More proof that an idiot can write bad code in any language - not just VB.
Dave Kreskowiak
Microsoft MVP
Visual Developer - Visual Basic 2006, 2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
More proof that an idiot can make any language look like VB...
----
It appears that everybody is under the impression that I approve of the documentation. You probably also blame Ken Burns for supporting slavery.
--Raymond Chen on MSDN
|
|
|
|
|
eunderwo00 wrote: private integer inc(integer int_i)
And what language is this, btw? Looks like C# or Java except for the integer type which is VB-like.
|
|
|
|
|
I would have to see the rest of their work before deciding, unless they where expected to work alone.
A degree does not guarantee that someone is a programmer, only that they are capable of learning. Until recently I did not have a degree and I have been a programmer for years. I did already have an associates degree in electronics, but I was not a technician long enough to claim it as a profession.
Here is an idea: Give them a personality test, that way you will have a better idea of how good a programmer they have the potential of becoming.
INTP
"Program testing can be used to show the presence of bugs, but never to show their absence."Edsger Dijkstra
|
|
|
|
|
I didn't consider the possibility, maybe he just had a brain fart? I can remember writing what i was thinking one or two times. Granted he SHOULD have read over his code before presenting it... I can say I've presented code to my boss without fully testing it out of stupid young confidence.
|
|
|
|
|
Bunch of bruts aren't you. Have some mercy for the young and inexperienced. In my work I sometimes see more creative work from people you would have fired.
|
|
|
|
|
That was more than a brain fart, but it would have done what it was designed to do. It was just a foolish thing to do.
I have never had a boss that could really understand the code without me explaining it to him. Matter of fact I cust one for saying I did not understand the question, when the fact was he did not understand the answer. Of course they had just hired him and he eventialy learned that I knew what I was doing.
INTP
"Program testing can be used to show the presence of bugs, but never to show their absence."Edsger Dijkstra
|
|
|
|
|
Did you offer him/her constructive criticism?
Otherwise they'll continue writing bad code. IMHO it's not really bad code as from what I can tell it looks valid. More bad practice, which is something only experience can teach you - at least osmething that trivial as I don't think Fowler, etc address those kind of design choices. :P
I'm finding the only constant in software development is change it self.
|
|
|
|
|
Hockey wrote: Did you offer him/her constructive criticism?
It doesn't sound like he did. In a few posts in this thread, I've been mentioning it...
|
|
|
|
|
eunderwo00 wrote: I hired a programmer right out of school.
Right out of Jr. High? How did the "programmer" pass his classes with skills like that?
█▒▒▒▒▒██▒█▒██
█▒█████▒▒▒▒▒█
█▒██████▒█▒██
█▒█████▒▒▒▒▒█
█▒▒▒▒▒██▒█▒██
|
|
|
|
|
Captain See Sharp wrote: How did the "programmer" pass his classes with skills like that?
To me this code shows that the programmer does not know c++ java or has not used it in a very long time.
Last modified: 2hrs 11mins after originally posted --
John
|
|
|
|
|
John M. Drescher wrote: To me this code shows that the programmer does not know c++ java or has not used it in a very long time.
Well, I starting learning C when I was 13. The increment and decrement operators are almost impossible to forget. There are many things about the C family of languages that really stick.
█▒▒▒▒▒██▒█▒██
█▒█████▒▒▒▒▒█
█▒██████▒█▒██
█▒█████▒▒▒▒▒█
█▒▒▒▒▒██▒█▒██
|
|
|
|
|
I think he should be informed of his mistake, encouragement might help him to overcome his deficiencies.
A.A.
asif
|
|
|
|
|
|
So what is wrong with it?
Use of private before a return declaration?
I'm unfamiliar with this syntax. In C++, private and public are used in the class declaration, not the function definitions.
|
|
|
|
|
eunderwo00 wrote: private integer inc(integer int_i)
{
integer int_j=int_i+1;
return int_j;
}
Ok this is an unnecessary function but what is the reason you let him go?
CleaKO
"I think you'll be okay here, they have a thin candy shell. 'Surprised you didn't know that.'" - Tommy (Tommy Boy) "Fill it up again! Fill it up again! Once it hits your lips, it's so good!" - Frank the Tank (Old School)
|
|
|
|
|
I'm wondering if he wrote additional functions for the remaining operators.
Dave Kreskowiak
Microsoft MVP
Visual Developer - Visual Basic 2006, 2007
|
|
|
|
|
I can only think that int_j should be explicitly assigned a value at declaration, before actual use in case int_i is passed unassigned, hence :
private integer inc(integer int_i)
{
integer int_j=0;
int_j=int_i+1;
return int_j;
}
|
|
|
|
|
sprint_sport wrote: I can only think that int_j should be explicitly assigned a value at declaration, before actual use in case int_i is passed unassigned, hence :
private integer inc(integer int_i)
{
integer int_j=0;
int_j=int_i+1;
return int_j;
}
Integers by default are 0 when declared just as booleans are false, strings are nothing, etc...
CleaKO
"I think you'll be okay here, they have a thin candy shell. 'Surprised you didn't know that.'" - Tommy (Tommy Boy) "Fill it up again! Fill it up again! Once it hits your lips, it's so good!" - Frank the Tank (Old School)
|
|
|
|