|
Work fast and die young. That seems to be the motto of professional world. "You load sixteen tons what do you get?"
|
|
|
|
|
|
Most developers don’t know how to test Bonus #0: Does the code work?
|
|
|
|
|
with absolutely no description whatsoever of the test’s purpose
I inherited a bunch of Ruby code where the only clue was the name of the test.  And to make matters more complicated, while there are 100's of unit tests, there are also 100's of integration tests, and when it fails, you basically get an "oops, something broke" error on the web page, or the test blows up because the next step (a button, a control, whatever) can't be found on the page.
And since the tests are written in a separate script language (cucumber, capybara, whatever, I can't remember the idiotic names the open source community likes to use and I don't want to) the stack trace (if you can call that abortion of class::method mess a stack) into the Ruby code is blown. I had to write a top-level exception handler to force a debug breakpoint that was monkey-patched (gawd, I hate Ruby) into the script runner (thank you SO for finding that gem, no pun intended.)
Oh, how I loathe Ruby. And pretty much any non-statically typed language.
Good article, it's rather quite surprising (or not, see my other rant below somewhere) that devs writing unit tests actually have to be taught these 5 basic questions. You shouldn't be writing unit tests (or code for that matter) if you don't know that already. 
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
Marc Clifton wrote: You shouldn't be writing unit tests (or code for that matter) if you don't know that already.
I know many people that shouldn't write code...
'Seniors' that haven't heard of SOLID or Design Patterns, who write functions with 100's of lines of code, who rely on copy/paste, who don't really know how types work, who put their business and data logic in their forms/controllers and who use hidden textboxes to store variables (yes, really). Some of these people have been writing code for 20 to 30 years at different companies.
Unfortunately they do write code, I get to fix their sh*t, and somehow they usually make more money too
|
|
|
|
|
IMHO there are 'Seniors' who heard of SOLID and Design Patterns but implement them all wrong - with idiotic constraints in the first case and "trying to fit a square in a circle" in the second.
I have to integrate code like that and it is hell.
As stated below, incompetent people generate bad products, anyway and every way that is possible.
Geek code v 3.12 {
GCS d--- s-/++ a- C++++ U+++ P- L- E-- W++ N++ o+ K- w+++ O? M-- V? PS+ PE- Y+ PGP t++ 5? X R++ tv-- b+ DI+++ D++ G e++>+++ h--- r++>+++ y+++*
Weapons extension: ma- k++ F+2 X
}
If you think 'goto' is evil, try writing an Assembly program without JMP. -- TNCaver
|
|
|
|
|
den2k88 wrote: IMHO there are 'Seniors' who heard of SOLID and Design Patterns but implement them all wrong
I've worked with a self-proclaimed senior who thought Single Responsibility Principle was equal to a class with just a single method. And if you have just a single method you don't need state either, so everything can be static...
After a vacation I once found he had 'refactored' my code into something like this:
static class SomeClass
{
static Something DoSomething(params)
{
}
}
static class AnotherClass
{
static Something DoSomething(params)
{
}
}Also, because all those classes had a method called DoSomething that always returned the same type and had the same parameters (that weren't always used) these classes (or rather methods) became interchangeable, making it good OO practice 
|
|
|
|
|
 did you work in Arkham? 
Geek code v 3.12 {
GCS d--- s-/++ a- C++++ U+++ P- L- E-- W++ N++ o+ K- w+++ O? M-- V? PS+ PE- Y+ PGP t++ 5? X R++ tv-- b+ DI+++ D++ G e++>+++ h--- r++>+++ y+++*
Weapons extension: ma- k++ F+2 X
}
If you think 'goto' is evil, try writing an Assembly program without JMP. -- TNCaver
|
|
|
|
|
Sander Rossel wrote: who write functions with 100's of lines of code, who rely on copy/paste, who don't really know how types work, who put their business and data logic in their forms/controllers and who use hidden textboxes to store variables
Sounds like my gig at the moment. 
Kevin
|
|
|
|
|
|
A few more:
6) Make sure both "actual" and "expected" are initialised to non default values different to each other before the test runs*
* (Obviously this can't be the case if they are bools - in that case make sure actual is always initialised to the non-default case so it has to undergo a change in order for the test to pass)
7) Write negative tests too.
|
|
|
|
|
Luckily ISOs are available for users of Windows 7, Windows 8/8.1 and Windows 10 to download and use to get the plain vanilla install of their OS without all those OEM extras. *License not included
|
|
|
|
|
As comments on the site point out, doesn't work very well with OEM versions. Sadly.
"If you don't fail at least 90 percent of the time, you're not aiming high enough."
Alan Kay.
|
|
|
|
|
The password, the chief means of securing access to our most valuable data, has become almost completely useless, no longer even presenting a speed bump for hackers and mischief makers. Which one? I have a few of them here.
|
|
|
|
|
I have a fingerprint scanner sitting on my desk, can't wait to see how easy it is to spoof it. I rather suspect that cyber-crime will escalate to new levels, beyond the more brutish "cut his thumb off" -- we will soon be seeing all sorts of new mischief in pulling your fingerprint off that wine glass or beer bottle and creating artificial thumbs.
And then there's that new Intel processor that will log you in based on a two camera view of your face. Now, why is that something only the "new" Intel processor can do? Anyways, sounds like it'll be fun to try an spoof too -- take a couple pictures of me at two different angles and hold them up to the cameras, I suppose. I wonder what would happen if I shave my beard.
At the end of the day, whatever you use to authenticate is just data, whether it's "Bob" or a K or so of thumbprint, eye scan or facial data.
There simply must be a better way.
Nope, not until we get brain implants and we can enter in a continually shifting randomized time limited sequence. We already have external versions of that like this[^], but even (can't remember the company name now) those are hackable. Oh well. 
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
Marc Clifton wrote: pulling your fingerprint off that wine glass or beer bottle and creating artificial thumbs.
Nah, it's far more easier to substitute one fingerprint reader with an "improved" version and record the data, then print it (whoo-hoo 3d printers!).
It is the standard method used to clone debt cards at ATMs.
Geek code v 3.12 {
GCS d--- s-/++ a- C++++ U+++ P- L- E-- W++ N++ o+ K- w+++ O? M-- V? PS+ PE- Y+ PGP t++ 5? X R++ tv-- b+ DI+++ D++ G e++>+++ h--- r++>+++ y+++*
Weapons extension: ma- k++ F+2 X
}
If you think 'goto' is evil, try writing an Assembly program without JMP. -- TNCaver
|
|
|
|
|
C is everywhere and in everything. "This is not a love song"
OK, it pretty much is.
|
|
|
|
|
I feel it in my fingers
I feel it in my toes
C is all around me
Come on and let it build
Geek code v 3.12 {
GCS d--- s-/++ a- C++++ U+++ P- L- E-- W++ N++ o+ K- w+++ O? M-- V? PS+ PE- Y+ PGP t++ 5? X R++ tv-- b+ DI+++ D++ G e++>+++ h--- r++>+++ y+++*
Weapons extension: ma- k++ F+2 X
}
If you think 'goto' is evil, try writing an Assembly program without JMP. -- TNCaver
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah, but a lot of that stuff is actually written in a combination of c and c++. Chrome for instance is mostly c++. Oracle JVM is c++, etc.
|
|
|
|
|
According to Stroustrup (C++ Apps[^]), the Mars Rover uses C++ too.
Quite funny that in a world where so much really does run C, he manages to compile a list in which over half actually used C++. Major fail.
"If you don't fail at least 90 percent of the time, you're not aiming high enough."
Alan Kay.
|
|
|
|
|
Twitter is alit today, it seems, with news of Google neutralising AdBlock Plus. Don't be irksome
|
|
|
|
|
That is why we created the Uninstall function.
Good-bye Chrome.
|
|
|
|
|
Control Panel -> Programs and Feature -> Chrome -> Uninstall
|
|
|
|
|
Why let reality (and this update came out sometime over the weekend) get in the way of a good clickbait:
Quote: Update: We have been contacted by Rob Wu, a developer on the Chromium project - the open-source foundation for the Chrome browser - who has informed us that this change was not intentional but, rather, an unintended result of fixing a previous security issue (CVE-2015-1297). He confirmed that the issue will only be seen if the YouTube app is installed and that, at the moment, apart from disabling AdBlock or whitelisting YouTube, the only solution, as described above, is to uninstall the app. The problem is expected to be patched in the upcoming weeks or, at least, when Chrome 46 is released.
Did you ever see history portrayed as an old man with a wise brow and pulseless heart, waging all things in the balance of reason?
Is not rather the genius of history like an eternal, imploring maiden, full of fire, with a burning heart and flaming soul, humanly warm and humanly beautiful?
--Zachris Topelius
Training a telescope on one’s own belly button will only reveal lint. You like that? You go right on staring at it. I prefer looking at galaxies.
-- Sarah Hoyt
|
|
|
|
|
Chrome cannot change the hostfile.
Bastard Programmer from Hell 
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
