Guys! It's 'code' NOT 'codes'.

I check the newbie's code. [correct]
I check the newbie's codes. [not correct]

Programmers write 'code'. It's an uncountable noun so we cannot pluralize it.

Spies use 'codes'.

It's codez! I read them on these internetz!

I dunno, I need more informations.

Thank you for this post. It's about time.

I concur wholeheartedly! My eyeballs hurry when I read "a code", or "these codes". With that said, I have seen the form "codes" in serious computer literature so I'm not so sure the whole world agrees with us. But then again, I'm not a native english speaker, and that fact might have applied to the authors of said literature as well.

@siljamicke *hurt, dammit!

@pixeltherapy first you need to do your homeworks

Whilst I agree that you're correct, I've never heard or seen anyone use 'codes'

c()d3z dude

Not all people speak English as their primary language. I work with quite a few off-shore developers who do a pretty amazing job with the language, given it isn't their native tongue.

@adamdwalker

Just read through devrant. Devrant is the reason I made this post.

a grammer Nazi spotted! 😄😁

@shivakrishna9

That's not a sentence. It's a predicate without a subject.

You could say "A grammar nazi has been spotted" or "I've spotted a grammar nazi."

Also, for god's sake, start your sentence with a capital letter.

@Ratwerks Could "to spot" be intransitive?

I used to only see "codes" used ironically. Nowadays, I see it used seriously much more often.

I usually just chalk it up to a dialectical difference -- similar to how British English refers to corporations in plural form ("Google are...")

I didn't know this was a thing