Click here to Skip to main content

The Weird and The Wonderful

The Weird and The Wonderful forum is a place to post Coding Horrors, Worst Practices, and the occasional flash of brilliance.

We all come across code that simply boggles the mind. Lazy kludges, embarrassing mistakes, horrid workarounds and developers just not quite getting it. And then somedays we come across - or write - the truly sublime.

Post your Best, your worst, and your most interesting. But please - no programming questions . This forum is purely for amusement and discussions on code snippets. All actual programming questions will be removed.

Re: Another Horror

CPallini26-Sep-08 4:07

26-Sep-08 4:07

Does you company pay for lines of code?
Smile | :)

Smile | :)

If the Lord God Almighty had consulted me before embarking upon the Creation, I would have recommended something simpler.
-- Alfonso the Wise, 13th Century King of Castile.

This is going on my arrogant assumptions. You may have a superb reason why I'm completely wrong.
-- Iain Clarke

[My articles]

Re: Another Horror

Narotham Babu Kalluri26-Sep-08 5:01

Narotham Babu Kalluri

26-Sep-08 5:01

I would definetly make that suggestion in the next apprisal cycle

Re: Another Horror

Paul Conrad26-Sep-08 6:06

26-Sep-08 6:06

You need to suggest doing stricter code reviews, if your company doesn't already do so.

"The clue train passed his station without stopping." - John Simmons / outlaw programmer

"Real programmers just throw a bunch of 1s and 0s at the computer to see what sticks" - Pete O'Hanlon

"Not only do you continue to babble nonsense, you can't even correctly remember the nonsense you babbled just minutes ago." - Rob Graham

Re: Another Horror

Single Step Debugger26-Sep-08 5:14

Single Step Debugger

26-Sep-08 5:14

My humble advice to you is: CHANGE THE COMPANY!!!

The narrow specialist in the broad sense of the word is a complete idiot in the narrow sense of the word.

Advertise here – minimum three posts per day are guaranteed.

Re: Another Horror

Paul Conrad26-Sep-08 6:04

26-Sep-08 6:04

Narotham Babu Kalluri wrote:
this part is written in many places of the application

That's too bad. What was the programmer thinking?

"The clue train passed his station without stopping." - John Simmons / outlaw programmer

"Real programmers just throw a bunch of 1s and 0s at the computer to see what sticks" - Pete O'Hanlon

"Not only do you continue to babble nonsense, you can't even correctly remember the nonsense you babbled just minutes ago." - Rob Graham

Re: Another Horror

Perspx26-Sep-08 6:09

26-Sep-08 6:09

I think he'd switched off Wink | ;)

Wink | ;)

Regards,
--Perspx

"I've got my kids brainwashed: You don't use Google, and you don't use an iPod." - Steve Ballmer

"Some people have told me they don't think a fat penguin really embodies the grace of Linux, which just tells me they have never seen an angry penguin charging at them in excess of 100mph." - Linus Torvalds

Re: Another Horror

Paul Conrad26-Sep-08 6:11

26-Sep-08 6:11

Perspx wrote:
switched

Laugh | :laugh:

Nice play on word there Big Grin | :-D

Big Grin | :-D

"The clue train passed his station without stopping." - John Simmons / outlaw programmer

"Real programmers just throw a bunch of 1s and 0s at the computer to see what sticks" - Pete O'Hanlon

"Not only do you continue to babble nonsense, you can't even correctly remember the nonsense you babbled just minutes ago." - Rob Graham

Re: Another Horror

Perspx26-Sep-08 6:14

26-Sep-08 6:14

Thanks

Smile | :)

Regards,
--Perspx

"I've got my kids brainwashed: You don't use Google, and you don't use an iPod." - Steve Ballmer

"Some people have told me they don't think a fat penguin really embodies the grace of Linux, which just tells me they have never seen an angry penguin charging at them in excess of 100mph." - Linus Torvalds

Re: Another Horror

Lutosław26-Sep-08 23:01

26-Sep-08 23:01

It seems that someone simply has knowledge leaks. Knowing that it is possible to pass a value of a variable to a function directly not like this, is bloody essential thing and it would be nice if someone told him or her that. Just snoop around to find out who wrote this and make a good deed today. Hmm.. it's a funny horror anyway. Smile | :)

Smile | :)

Greetings - Gajatko

Portable.NET is part of DotGNU, a project to build a complete Free Software replacement for .NET - a system that truly belongs to the developers.

Re: Another Horror

cpkilekofp29-Sep-08 4:25

29-Sep-08 4:25

Narotham Babu Kalluri wrote:
I've found this piece of code recently in my new project
if(a==1 || a==2 || a==3 || a==4)
{
if(a==1)
DoSomething(1);
else if(a==2)
DoSomething(2);
else if(a==3)
DoSomething(3);
else if(a==4)
DoSomething(4);
}

Since this programmer obviously can't make a switch in code, your company should make a switch of employees.

Re: Another Horror

Paul Conrad29-Sep-08 6:54

29-Sep-08 6:54

Someone voted you down for that. Gave you a 5 to balance it out Roll eyes | :rolleyes:

Roll eyes | :rolleyes:

"The clue train passed his station without stopping." - John Simmons / outlaw programmer

"Real programmers just throw a bunch of 1s and 0s at the computer to see what sticks" - Pete O'Hanlon

"Not only do you continue to babble nonsense, you can't even correctly remember the nonsense you babbled just minutes ago." - Rob Graham

Re: Another Horror

cpkilekofp29-Sep-08 8:07

29-Sep-08 8:07

Paul Conrad wrote:
Someone voted you down for that. Gave you a 5 to balance it out

Laugh | :laugh:

Thanks

Re: Another Horror

Lutosław30-Sep-08 13:33

30-Sep-08 13:33

if (a >= 1 && a <= 4)
   DoSomething(a);

is a better option than a switch I think Smile | :)

Smile | :)

.

Greetings - Gajatko

Portable.NET is part of DotGNU, a project to build a complete Free Software replacement for .NET - a system that truly belongs to the developers.

Re: Another Horror

cpkilekofp1-Oct-08 3:32

1-Oct-08 3:32

gajatko wrote:
if (a >= 1 && a <= 4) DoSomething(a);

is a better option than a switch I think .

Hmmmm...in this case, yes Smile | :)

Smile | :)

Re: Another Horror

VentsyV1-Oct-08 11:52

1-Oct-08 11:52

And that's why your previous post got voted down.

Re: Another Horror

cpkilekofp2-Oct-08 4:49

2-Oct-08 4:49

VentsyV wrote:
And that's why your previous post got voted down.

Laugh | :laugh:

once I start caring, I might start paying attention to the scores.

Re: Another Horror

VentsyV2-Oct-08 8:37

2-Oct-08 8:37

That post was for Paul Conrad's benefit really.

Re: Another Horror

cpkilekofp2-Oct-08 9:54

2-Oct-08 9:54

VentsyV wrote:
That post was for Paul Conrad's benefit really.

A pity, then, that it appeared as a reply to MY post. I am an INNOCENT BYSTANDER!! Sniff | :^)

Sniff | :^)

Re: Another Horror

Popular

Pete O'Hanlon29-Sep-08 8:14

29-Sep-08 8:14

Ah. Don't worry about it. You see, the compiler takes a look at this and works out the redundancy. In fact, the redundancy notices should be on their desks by the time the link cycle has completed.

Deja View - the feeling that you've seen this post before.

My blog | My articles | MoXAML PowerToys

Re: Another Horror

dojohansen1-Oct-08 4:32

1-Oct-08 4:32

LOL

Re: Another Horror

dojohansen1-Oct-08 5:46

1-Oct-08 5:46

That is almost beautiful in it's inelegance! It is hard to come up with something convoluted and still have code that looks like the person writing it didn't try hard to make it as convoluted as possible...

Re: Another Horror

Sauce!1-Oct-08 23:01

1-Oct-08 23:01

if(a==1 || a==2 || a==3 || a==4)<br /> {<br /> if(a==1)<br /> DoSomething(1);<br /> else if(a==2)<br /> DoSomething(2);<br /> else if(a==3)<br /> DoSomething(3);<br /> else if(a==4)<br /> DoSomething(4);<br /> }

DoSomething(a);

Re: Another Horror

ChrisKiki6-Oct-08 0:27

6-Oct-08 0:27

big LOL, maybe this is how the runtime actually works Poke tongue | ;-P

Poke tongue | ;-P

This is just for the laugh of it.

Popular

adamsappel22-Sep-08 2:24

22-Sep-08 2:24

Hi. Background: Co-Worker, (Female <- not biased, just stating the fact), Qualification: Architect...
(btw, this is all C# VS2008 code, I swear)

Ok, one for the count:

public static bool NameExists (string name)
{
   bool exists = false;
   int i = 0;
   while ((i < someListContainingNames.Count) && (exists == false))
   {
      if (someListContainingNames[i] == filename)
      {
         exists = true;
      }
      i++;
   }
   return exists;
}

Please see if you can read this... (Original code kept):

else if (   ((isEXEDLL == true) || (isEXEConfig == true))
         && ((staysTheSameEXEDLL == false) || (EXEDLLPathExistsSoCanProcess == true))
         )
{
   if (  ((isEXEDLL == true) || (isEXEConfig == true))
      && (staysTheSameEXEDLL == false)
      )
   {
      if (canCopy.DoCopy == true)
      {

Spot the redundency (Regex's left out):

string str = "";
string str2 = "";
Regex regex1 = new Regex(regex1String, RegexOptions.IgnoreCase);
Regex regex2 = new Regex(regex2String, RegexOptions.IgnoreCase);
Regex regex3 = new Regex(regex3String, RegexOptions.IgnoreCase);
Regex regex4 = new Regex(regex4String, RegexOptions.IgnoreCase);

if (regex1.IsMatch(filename))
{
   str = regex1.Match(filename).Groups["code"].Value.ToUpper();
   str2 = regex1.Match(filename).Groups["type"].Value.ToUpper();
}
else if (regex2.IsMatch(filename))
{
   str = regex2.Match(filename).Groups["code"].Value.ToUpper();
   str2 = regex2.Match(filename).Groups["type"].Value.ToUpper();
}
else if (regex3.IsMatch(filename))
{
   str = regex3.Match(filename).Groups["code"].Value.ToUpper();
   str2 = regex3.Match(filename).Groups["type"].Value.ToUpper();
}
else if (regex4.IsMatch(filename))
{
   str = regex4.Match(filename).Groups["code"].Value.ToUpper();
   str2 = regex4.Match(filename).Groups["type"].Value.ToUpper();
}
else
{
   str = "";
   str2 = "";
}

if (  (regex1.IsMatch(filename))
   || (regex2.IsMatch(filename))
   || (regex3.IsMatch(filename))
   || (regex4.IsMatch(filename))
   )
{

Didn't get that one? Try this one:

if (dr.GetValue(dr.GetOrdinal("Copy")).ToString().Trim() == "1")
   copyChecked = true;
else
   copyChecked = false;

Ok, now I'm not pedantic, this I can promise you, but when you come across something like this little gem... (Only method name and class type changed...)

public static bool MethodName(ObjectWithBoolean objectThatHasBool)
{
   if (objectThatHasBool.booleanValue)
   {
      return false;
   }
   else
   {
      return true;
   }
}

Last, but DEFINITELY not the least, here's a little sql query that my "collegue" wrote. See if you can spot the query:

StringBuilder queryString = new StringBuilder();
//this is the query that updates the actual data
queryString.Append("IF EXISTS ");
queryString.Append("(SELECT ID ");
queryString.Append("FROM ");
queryString.Append("Table1 ");
queryString.Append("WHERE ID = ");
queryString.Append(id);
queryString.Append(") ");
queryString.Append("BEGIN ");
queryString.Append("UPDATE ");
queryString.Append("Table1 SET ");
queryString.Append("ComlumnValue1 = ");
queryString.Append("'");
queryString.Append(Value1);
queryString.Append("' ");
queryString.Append(", ComlumnValue2 = ");
queryString.Append(Value2);
queryString.Append(", ComlumnValue3 = ");
queryString.Append(Value3);
queryString.Append(" WHERE ID = ");
queryString.Append("'");
queryString.Append(id);
queryString.Append("' ");
queryString.Append("AND ");
queryString.Append("(ISNULL(ComlumnValue1,0) <> ");
queryString.Append("'");
queryString.Append(Value1);
queryString.Append("' ");
queryString.Append(" OR ");
queryString.Append("ISNULL(ComlumnValue2,0) <> ");
queryString.Append(Value2);
queryString.Append(" OR ");
queryString.Append("ISNULL(ComlumnValue3,0) <> ");
queryString.Append(Value3);
queryString.Append(") ");
queryString.Append(" END ");
queryString.Append("ELSE BEGIN declare @ID int ");
queryString.Append("exec ssl_GetTable1CallSeq 1, ");
queryString.Append("@ID OUTPUT ");
queryString.Append("IF ");
queryString.Append("NOT EXISTS(SELECT * FROM Table1 WHERE ID = ");
queryString.Append(id);
queryString.Append(") ");
queryString.Append("INSERT ");
queryString.Append("INTO Table1 (ID, Name, ");
queryString.Append("ComlumnValue1, ");
queryString.Append("ComlumnValue2, ");
queryString.Append("ComlumnValue3) ");
queryString.Append("VALUES ");
queryString.Append("(@ID, ");
queryString.Append("'");
queryString.Append(name);
queryString.Append("', ");
queryString.Append("'");
queryString.Append(Value1);
queryString.Append("', ");
queryString.Append(Value2);
queryString.Append(", ");
queryString.Append(Value3);
queryString.Append(" ) END ");

command.CommandText = queryString.ToString();

Thanks for listening to my little rant. Any comments very welcome, Smile | :)

Smile | :)

Re: This is just for the laugh of it.

Popular

CPallini22-Sep-08 3:06

22-Sep-08 3:06

No surprise: Architects are supposed to design buildings...
Big Grin | :-D

Big Grin | :-D

If the Lord God Almighty had consulted me before embarking upon the Creation, I would have recommended something simpler.
-- Alfonso the Wise, 13th Century King of Castile.

This is going on my arrogant assumptions. You may have a superb reason why I'm completely wrong.
-- Iain Clarke

[My articles]

General News Suggestion Question Bug Answer Joke Praise Rant Admin

Use Ctrl+Left/Right to switch messages, Ctrl+Up/Down to switch threads, Ctrl+Shift+Left/Right to switch pages.