|
Almost as good as 'stringly typed' (when string is used as universal datatype for everything).
I need a perfect, to the point answer as I am not aware of this.
Please don't reply explaining what method overloading is
|
|
|
|
|
Clearly, we've both seen the same kinda databases before.
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
Not only databases. It gets really sick when something like this appears in the code:
(somecontrol.text = float.Parse(x) * float.Parse(y)).ToString();
x and y are strings, of course. Th use of float.parse() can fail any time when the strings can't be parsed, no checks or a try/catch block. The text property of the control of course also serves as stringly typed storage for the calclated value. And that's only the beginning of the horrors in that ASP.Net web form.
I need a perfect, to the point answer as I am not aware of this.
Please don't reply explaining what method overloading is
|
|
|
|
|
About the only logical explanation I can come up with is if they're using like a web service that only has strings for data. Outside of that...
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
Some people never really get what types are all about. This particular guy would have been insulted after such unwarranted criticism. He was one of those who could recite every rule and convention there may be and believes that everything is well as long as these rules are observed. Who needs to think when some guru already has done that and packaged his wisdom in rules and conventions?
I need a perfect, to the point answer as I am not aware of this.
Please don't reply explaining what method overloading is
|
|
|
|
|
Common sense ain't so common man.
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
I have seen that before. In some companies it's the standard procedure to reduce the code monkeys to better typists and keep them in line with rules and conventions. What do you think happens when you try to give one of those poor guys room to think for themselves?
I need a perfect, to the point answer as I am not aware of this.
Please don't reply explaining what method overloading is
|
|
|
|
|
CodeWraith wrote: What do you think happens when you try to give one of those poor guys room to think for themselves I have just heard the exact opposite - outsourced project to Hyderabad and the PM is bitching that the "developers" can't think for themselves and need to be spoon fed every decision.
She now knows the difference between a developer and a code monkey.
Never underestimate the power of human stupidity
RAH
|
|
|
|
|
Mycroft Holmes wrote: She now knows the difference between a developer and a code monkey. Yup. In my view a code monkey knows one thing and one thing only... code. <robot_voice>Must... compute... X... Y... Z</robot_voice> And has very little understanding about people, teams, being a good leader or a good follower, how to play poker, anything at all really besides just code.
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
"To a boy with a hammer, the whole world looks like a nail".
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jeremy Falcon wrote: Common sense ain't so common man.
Heard it a different way:
Common sense ... the curse in disguise: Because if you have it, you're doomed to live with those that don't!
|
|
|
|
|
Reminds me of my MBA studies. Yes, business school is the study of common sense (in a capitalist society).
|
|
|
|
|
I think I've worked with that guy. Or maybe there's just a bunch of them
"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics."
- Benjamin Disraeli
|
|
|
|
|
There sure are more of them than we think. The poor guys have been used as code monkeys and stuffed full with rules and conventions. Then, when they finally invented something on their own, they are proud of their unique solution and don't waste any time on thinking about why nobody else does it quite this way. At least not until some wise guy comes along and declares the grand idea to be a code horror. Then they fall back to their old line of defense, which would be patterns, rules and conventions. If you don't break any rules, your solution can't possibly be bad.
I need a perfect, to the point answer as I am not aware of this.
Please don't reply explaining what method overloading is
|
|
|
|
|
That sort-of like the people who "round to 2 decimal places" by converting the number to a string, truncating the end, and converting back to a number.
Truth,
James
|
|
|
|
|
You want to tell me that this is not the way it's usually done?
I need a perfect, to the point answer as I am not aware of this.
Please don't reply explaining what method overloading is
|
|
|
|
|
You mean those with the Json/XML/whatnot backing? As if they're "proud" to convert back-n-forth with this "stringly typed".
|
|
|
|
|
varchar(50), to be precise.
If you think 'goto' is evil, try writing an Assembly program without JMP.
|
|
|
|
|
That needs a soft reset.
"the debugger doesn't tell me anything because this code compiles just fine" - random QA comment
"Facebook is where you tell lies to your friends. Twitter is where you tell the truth to strangers." - chriselst
"I don't drink any more... then again, I don't drink any less." - Mike Mullikins uncle
|
|
|
|
|
I would say that the programmer who did that needs some percussive maintenance (AKA a slap upside the head).
If you have an important point to make, don't try to be subtle or clever. Use a pile driver. Hit the point once. Then come back and hit it again. Then hit it a third time - a tremendous whack.
--Winston Churchill
|
|
|
|
|
Over here it's called a "Stupid Stick".
|
|
|
|
|
In the event that circumstances should warrant* you say so.
(also known as 'if').
Ravings en masse^ |
---|
"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
Here's one... how about Optimized (finally fixed the damn thing from being a memory hog during the POC phase, removing old commented out code, etc.)
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
What character flaw drives some people to create new terms to describe things which are already perfectly well described by existing - and usually simpler - terms?
Will Rogers never met me.
|
|
|
|