Do all the things like ++ or -- rants, post your own rants, comment on others' rants and build your customized dev avatarSign Up
74003427343dThat's the code equivalent of compiling again without changing anything, hoping that it will work this time
TylerDDevRant2053343dAnd of course there was only indirect unit-testing because of unit-tests of classes which use the configFactory.
And of course I will refactor the shot outta this factory class ^^
OneOrZero1547343dClassic example of learning programming patterns, while neglecting the fundamentals
Lycocain393343dMight aswell use recursion until it would work 😂
"It ain't stoopid, if it works!"
"Stfu! Go refactor and cover your unholy piece of code"
djsumdog3183343dI hate it when people treat machines like everything else they do. Machines are deterministic. They are not dogs, cats or other pets. You don't ever "save again, just to be sure." If it didn't work the first time, it's not going to work the second time, and if it does, you've got some serious race conditions in there.
Beware code that's like
save(); //Just in case
No! Stop that!.
lotd8297343dWhat was Einsteins definition of insanity, again?
arjaycodes549343dwhat language is this...?
Your Job Suck?
Take a quick quiz from Triplebyte to skip the job search hassles and jump to final interviews at hot tech firms
Get a Better Job