|
bn2vs wrote: and will always check their nubness level before accepting any job
During the interview sessions they demonstrated the company and theirselves as truly openminded with the need to hire an experienced developer in order to accomplish a technological breakthru and update to their major product and to deliver knowledge and guiding directives to the rest of the development team. I bite that crap then and I left from my prior company which was awesome.
Actually I'm the one responsible for all the development team but he doesnt let me make any decision in technical level and in case I make a decision by myself without asking him, we finally arrive at the point of how wrong was that decision and how much did i mislead the team and how much time did i spent in the wrong direction . "I want results. Keep your theoretical background for your academic carreer". Its the main moto.
|
|
|
|
|
Do you work for my previous CTO?
His favorite mantra was "Keep it simple stupid" and he didn't understand any of the technical considerations required to keep a complicated, feature rich application simple. And dropping (complicated) phrases like "Data access layer", "Unit test" and "Undo / Redo Stack" would generally get a hostile response of "Wtf are you talking about? It sounds complicated."
Looking back, i should have realised it was actually his lack of education and i wasn't talking sh*t.
-------------------------------
Carrier Bags - 21st Century Tumbleweed.
|
|
|
|
|
While he's at it why doesn't he restrict you to using only one hand on a computer without a keyboard or monitor?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Holy crap! Time to update the ol' resume!
|
|
|
|
|
Holy crap. How brown is your boss's nose? Otherwise I simply don't understand how such a person could get into a position like that.
--
Kein Mitleid Für Die Mehrheit
|
|
|
|
|
Unfortunately he owns the company... 
|
|
|
|
|
I was working with some old code (well, as usual) and came across this situation where the debugger reported an unhandled exception. I handled it, and well...
try
{
}
catch(CPrException *pExc)
{
OutputDebugString(pExc->GetErrorDescription());
delete pExc;
}
And error description printed in the external debugger was:
Something is really wrong! 
Something is wrong? Really wrong? Well, thanks for letting me know. Someone out there was having a really wicked sense of humor while writing it. I would personally want to take him out and beat him to death with an old-skool mechanical keyboard.
It is a crappy thing, but it's life -^ Carlo Pallini
|
|
|
|
|
I have adopted also some code from vb. This code logs on customer machines to the windows eventlogger. The log will only tell me: "Invalid operation. Call you system administrator" There is no error code. No trace where the hell it is going wrong. So they call me.
I work here 2 years now and the original developer left 1 year ago. Ofcourse now i get the error messages.
All i am saying, i know your pain!
|
|
|
|
|
Something was really wrong, with the original coder!
|
|
|
|
|
I'll second that - LOL 
GSoC 2009 student for SMW!
---
My little forums: http://code.bn2vs.com
---
70 72 6F 67 72 61 6D 6D 69 6E 67 20 34 20 6C 69 66 65!
|
|
|
|
|
Having been there myself many times I understand that at crunch time error messages get minimal consideration. But if there is time to write "Something is really wrong!" surely there is time to write an error message that is a wee bit more helpful. 
Bill W
Just because the code works, it doesn't mean that it is good code.
|
|
|
|
|
Here's one you've probably seen before..
while ( GlobalBufferPos > BytesToRead )
{
if (
{
}
else
{
Temp =
}
GlobalReadPos += BytesToRead;
if(GlobalReadPos > MAX_SIZE) GlobalReadPos -= MAX_SIZE;
GlobalBufferPos -= BytesToRead;
WriteData(...);
Temp = BytesToRead
break;
}
I suppose it made sense at the time.
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah, probably. I would assume that originally they wanted the while and later decided otherwise; I would either have removed the while or made the break conditional.
|
|
|
|
|
I have on occasion used:
{
...
do {
...
if (condition) break;
...
if (condition) break;
...
} while(0);
...with the while() "loop" being merely a block from which the code could "break". I wonder if the code here began as something similar, but replacing an "if()" and "do {} while()" with a "while()" and a "break".
|
|
|
|
|
No, that horror is by people who think it's less of a horror than a goto.
|
|
|
|
|
PIEBALDconsult wrote: No, that horror is by people who think it's less of a horror than a goto.
Many modern languages support exceptions on the basis that conventional structured programming constructs can't practically handle everything that programs need to do. In languages which support exceptions, they should be used when appropriate. What would you suggest doing, if not a 'goto' or 'break', in situations where an exception would be appropriate but the language doesn't support them?
BTW, I wish some standards agency would draft an extension of the C99 standard which would allow something like exceptions but only within a particular function (C++, which allows full-fledged extensions, already exists, but run-time support for exceptions requires too much overhead to be practical on some smaller microcontrollers; limited support for exceptions within a function could improve program structure without impacting code size, speed, or RAM requirements.
|
|
|
|
|
Huh? I use goto when necessary (which is very rare).
|
|
|
|
|
goto bathroom.
goto kitchen.
goto pub.
They seem necessary
Panic, Chaos, Destruction.
My work here is done.
|
|
|
|
|
Only the bathroom is a necessary.
|
|
|
|
|
Just an optional requirement..... 
|
|
|
|
|
I don't have the exact code, but a while ago I've seen someone do something like this in VB.Net:
sub codeHorror()
dim amount as integer
dim isTrue as boolean
amount = cint(textbox1.text)
' some unrelated code
isTrue = cbool(amount)
' Some unrelated code
amount = cint(isTrue)
messagebox.show(cstr(amount))
end sub
The person who did this had little experience with coding, but had done application design on paper (with PST'z) for almost half a year - proof of my school failing at teaching logically.
GSoC 2009 student for SMW!
---
My little forums: http://code.bn2vs.com
---
70 72 6F 67 72 61 6D 6D 69 6E 67 20 34 20 6C 69 66 65!
|
|
|
|
|
You know ... sometimes I think that the compiler should'nt compile such a code !! and display a message for the developer :"For God Sake What with the hell is that !!!" 
Sincerely Samer Abu Rabie
Imagination is more important than knowledge !
|
|
|
|
|
Paperclip: I see that you are trying to... (scratches head) what exactly are you trying to do?
|
|
|
|
|
Sincerely Samer Abu Rabie
Imagination is more important than knowledge !
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
