Join devRant
Do all the things like
++ or -- rants, post your own rants, comment on others' rants and build your customized dev avatar
Sign Up
Pipeless API
From the creators of devRant, Pipeless lets you power real-time personalized recommendations and activity feeds using a simple API
Learn More
Search - "80s code"
-
A lot of engineering fads go in circle.
Architecture in the 80s: Mainframe and clients.
Architecture in the 90s: Software systems connected by an ESB.
Architecture in the 2000s: Big central service and everyone connects to it for everything
Architecture in the 2010s: Decentralized microservices that communicate with queues.
Current: RabbitMQ and Kafka.
... Can't we just go back to the 90s?
I hate fads.
I hate when I have to get some data, and it's scattered on 20 different servers, and to load a fucking account page, a convoluted network of 40 apps have to be activated, some in PHP, others in JS, others on Java, that are developed by different teams, connected to different tiny ass DBs, all on huge clusters of tiny ass virtual machines that get 30% load at peak hours, 90% of which comes from serializing and parsing messages. 40 people maintaining this nightmare, that could've been just 7 people making a small monolithic system that easily handles this workload on a 4-core server with 32GB of RAM.
Tripple it, put it behind a load balancer, proper DB replication (use fucking CockroachDB if you really want survivability), and you've got zero downtime at a fraction of the cost.
Just because something's cool now, doesn't mean that everybody has to blindly follow it for fucks sake!
Same rant goes for functional vs OOP and all that crap. Going blindly with any of these is just a stupid fad, and the main reason why companies need refactoring of legacy code.12 -
"Here's an example code for Commodore 64. It should work on your Commodore 16 if you just leave out the POKEs and PEEKs."
Said by my sister somewhere in the mid 80s. This particular advice was silly, but I owe her for my interest in coding. It was actually her who begged our parents to get us a home computer, and took programming courses. She got bored with it though, and I got hooked up for life. Thanks sis!6 -
Not Speaking The Same Programming Language
(It is the mid 80s, and I have a coworker come to me with two full pages of computer programming source code.)
Coworker: “Hey, can you help me with this? This function is not working right.”
Me: “Sure. What’s it do?”
Coworker: “Well, on the first line I copy…” *drones on for a few seconds about stuff I can clearly read*
Me: “Wait! Let me interrupt for a moment. I can read the code. In 20 words or less, what does this do?“
Coworker: *long pause that tells me he’s having trouble seeing the forest for the trees* “It, um, converts a date that’s a string to three integers: month, day, and year.”
Me: “Ah! Excellent. And by the time you get the string, has it been sanitized? You know, guaranteed to be pairs of digits with a slash in-between, not blanks or words or other garbage?”
Coworker: “Oh, yeah, all the user input is cleaned up.”
Me: “Okay, good.”
(I scribble “sscanf(text, “%02d/%02d/%02d”, &month, &day, &year);” in a blank spot on the page.)
Me: “Throw out everything and replace it with that.”
Coworker: “You’re kidding.”
Me: “Not at all. Use that. It’ll work. Trust me.”
Coworker: *not sure* “Well, okay.”
(Half an hour later he’s back and looking a bit sheepish.)
Coworker: “That worked. Thanks.”
Me: “No problem.”
(It’s been 30 years. Unfortunately, the new generation of programmers is in the same spot.)
https://notalwaysright.com/not-spea...2 -
Fuck pep8 in general. Fuck harder anything to do with line limits. Fuck with a rusty spatula those who tie it into their git precommits or CI tests.
What's that, it's 2018 and even the shittiest walmart-tier computers have 1080p OR BETTER at a 16:9 aspect ratio?
"lol, 80 character line limit."
Eat a bucket of rancid dicks.
Oh, and since we're forcing you to be so economical with your characters, we're going to force four space tabs. Yknow, rather than simple single tab characters, which could mean everyone can set their preferred level of spacing without bloating the code with whitespace.
Because, yknow, it's entirely reasonable to chew up 1/8 of a line because you're editing a function inside a class definition. God Almighty forbid you try to do a for loop inside that function! Fuck you!
"Oh but you can't have two editors or terminals open side by side without that limit!"
BULL FUCKING SHIT. Here's my shitty 1280x1024 display on my shitty computer with two Sublime editors open side by side. You'll notice the break is at 100 characters. You'll notice I don't have to scroll horizontally to do two things at once. You'll notice I even have room for COMMENTS!
If your code standards require you to make your code *less* readable and *less* clear and take up *more* space to accomplish the same tasks, YOUR CODE STANDARDS SUCK!
Enough with this stupid meme. We're not in the 80s anymore and it's high time to start fucking acting like it.7 -
for your next edition of "TI's constantly been smoking crack since the 80s and has no intention of ever stopping":
the TI-8x calculators have a hardware buffer and an OS-provided buffer for screen data, effectively being an "immediate" buffer in hardware, to be displayed next VBlank, and a "slower" buffer, being what's copied to the "immediate" buffer when the OS decides it's time to update the screen. All well and good, maybe a little weirdly done but all in all makes sense. (You can even define a third buffer in RAM if you need to triple-buffer your shit.)
The problem arises when you use TI-BASIC and try to draw to the screen:
If you do something like, say, draw a circle, you'll notice that it's visibly drawn to the screen one pixel at a time. However, looking through what bits of the SDK I can find, the OS' "draw circle" assembly routine *doesn't update the immediate buffer!*
This means that, in TI-BASIC, the "draw circle" routine doesn't use the ACTUAL circle-drawing routine the OS provides, but instead individually calculates and plots a pixel, then updates the hardware buffer (an ENTIRE 768 bytes are copied EVERY TIME) and waits for VBlank to pass before repeating for the next one. In other words, it's deliberately slow as fuck.
Why? All the drawing commands, outside of like 2 or 3, do this. Why would you deliberately slow down the process of drawing to the screen on a system that you KNEW would be popular for people to code on???9 -
This isn't about dev, but is related as it was one of my first times seeing how tech could be abused or used in a creative way.
When I was a kid doorbell ditching was a thing. Also, flashing was a thing. Dudes would be naked in a trench coat and flash random people. The 80s was a strange time.
Anyway, my brothers liked to pull pranks. So they took apart a flashlight and mounted a switch into some wires to hold in their hand. They wore a trench coat, had all their clothes on, but wired the light part of the flashlight to their belt at about crotch level.
Then they went to houses at night, rang the doorbell. When people opened the door they flung open their trench coat and blinked the flash light a couple of times and ran away. Everybody in the neighborhood thought it was hilarious.
Ever since then I have had an interest in repurposing technology and code for fun things.1 -
Here's some delphi code where one random developer from the 80s tries to force an error
if k=N then
begin
Memo.Lines.Add('Error, [some info]');
a:= 0 ; b:=b/a; {Here we try to force an error}
end ;
Oh god :'( -
Aside from simple programs I wrote by hand-transcribing code from the "Basic Training" section of 3-2-1 Contact magazine when I was a kid in the '80s, I would say the first project I ever undertook on my own that had a meaningful impact on others was when I joined a code migration team when I was 25. It was 2003.
We had a simple migration log that we would need to fill out when we performed any work. It was a spreadsheet, and because Excel is a festering chunk of infected cat shit, the network-shared file would more often than not be locked by the last person to have the file open. One night after getting prompted to open the document read-only again, I decided I'd had it.
I went to a used computer store and paid $75 out of pocket for an old beater, brought it back to the office, hooked it to the network, installed Lunar Linux on it, and built a simple web-based logging application that used a bash-generated flat file backend. Two days later, I had it working well enough to show it to the team, and they unanimously agreed to switch to it, rather than continue to shove Excel's jagged metal dick up our asses.
My boss asked me where I was hosting it, as such an application in company space would have certainly required his approval to procure. I showed him the completely unauthorized Linux machine(remember, this was 2003, when fortune 500 corporations, such as my employer, believed Ballmer's FUD-spew about Linux being a "virus" was real and not nonsense at all), and he didn't even hesitate to back me up and promise to tell the network security gestapo to fuck off if they ever came knocking. They never did.
I was later informed that the team continued to use the application for about five years after I left. -
Hasn't technology become magic - and we ignorant sorcerer's apprentices who can perform a video call to the other side of the globe perhaps while we understand only some bytes of the thousands software snippets that were piled up by us code monkeys to perform the miracle? ...
This however has always been the state of software (for us developers): that this house of cards needs constant care by our hands to not collapse - in constant fear we may preserve the facades while the number of components that interact, the sheer mass of code only allow for guesswork and hotfixes accumulating the technical debt. Yes, we have all that terms for that. The problems are known since the 80s or 60s, so we might be relabeling it once in a while, but mainly it is just: complexity.. or entropy.2 -
2 weeks+ ago I made a PR into our codebase containing sample refactor that streamlined a significant portion of code. Also, I did refactor only on two handler packages (for MVC folks, that's Controller) as proof of concept, to figure out how convinient / logical the part would be for everyone.
We have rule of 2 approvals for merge (for 5 team members)
While writing refactor, it obviously blown up a lot of unit tests, but still coverage was fairly poor (that stuff was rushed, there was back than no time for unit tests). After my refactor I spent couple of days writing tests that hit fairly sweet (comparatively) coverage. (I managed to bump coverage from low 20s to high 80s, and have less code for tests)
I got first approve pretty much immidietely, other team member was on vacations, and 2 of them forgot.
We generally try to close PRs fairly quickly (usually same day kind of deal), but that one was just.. hanging in there. So I pinged everyone to re-check it to greenlight it but of course, loo and behold, merge conflicts arised. I ended up fixing actual logic (just some method signatures changed, not a big deal) and ran the units.
So, one of that handlers got quite a few of edits, and guess who is pretty much rewriting unit tests for second time now...
Dude, sometimes I question why tf I even bother with these tests... Feels like sabotaging my productivity, especially with bullshit like that3