My first rant here, don't know how to start, but fuck these self proclaimed senior developers who can't even get their concepts right about basic things and don't believe in reading docs.

Fuck you for asking if sequelize has a method to return details of the logged in user of your app, it's a fucking ORM you dumbfuck. You are a "full stack" developer for fuck's sake.

Fuck you for making those "minor changes" which breaks build and then blame it on any random plugin or lib used, or my commits.

Fuck you for expecting me to review your code on Sundays because you couldn't finish it on time.

I don't like java, at all, but even I get that without it we wouldn't be where we are right now and can't reach where we aspire to reach. But you can't keep chanting "Java is dead, Java is dead" every chance you get. No, it's NOT dead. Nor is going to, anytime soon.

And for god's sake, please stop choosing one library/plugin over another just on the basis of stars on repo, it's not the only (or valid) criteria. Look if you actually even need it. Think.

And please learn how to google first, and also stop using "the" before every the noun, the adjective and the verb. It's the fucking the annoying to read.

And yes, there are different linting presets out there, and just because a piece of code in a plugin/library/boilerplate is not following your specific, and may I say horrible standard, doesn't mean it's a "bad code". It's written by people who have created/worked-on these libraries as side projects on which your entire career is based upon.

And I haven't even talked about the code you write or your domain knowledge or the way you treat other people. So get off your high horse and behave like a developer, a real one.

Back in the day when I was a junior developer, I somehow got hired by this guy who asked me to code his entire platform from scratch. I was being paid a junior dev salary, being asked to do senior dev work, and unfortunately I needed the money, so I didn't want to turn the job down. So I did what any junior dev would do in the situation... I decided to experiment and ended up with an insanely inefficient codebase.

For some stupid reason I thought that a good DB model would be to pull one record from the DB at a time, and then just repeat the method in a loop as needed. Keep in mind I was a self-taught junior dev. The backend worked great during development, and after 3 months of developing we decided to add a lot of data in the DB for further testing, and... you guessed it... the platform slowed down like shit!

Moral of the story... u get what you pay for, so hire great talent and pay them well! And also that self-taught junior devs don't know that the f@*k they are doing sometimes.

So there is this girl who joined the company as a trainee.

The company developed a 1 year project to train 25 trainees and she joined saying that she already had some experience making websites. (remember this)

They started in the beginning of January and stayed for about 3 months just studying the platform (Salesforce) and receiving some classes from Senior Devs, on subjects like OOP basics, loops, conditions and features of the platform.

After this time they joined the teams, 2 joined my team, a guy with 32 years that worked 10 years in a bank and wanted to go for a IT job and the girl of 22.

We gave her a really small task, just to make a code to copy info from one field to the other on a list of objects.

After 3 days of saying she was working on it we asked her to show us the code, she had written the "code" directly in the class, VS Code was going crazy with errors. When we asked her "But where is the method?", she answered "What is a method?"

After it we had other experiences trying to teach her some things. The team was formed by me (mid level dev), another mid level dev, a senior and a architect (who was self taught and one of the best teachers I've ever seen).

We tried for about 3 months to teach her how to do basic stuff, like a for loop, and every time we learned that she was missing some "foundations" of this basic stuff, so we would come back and explain the foundation, and a couple times she needed to use this knowledge like a week later and didn't remember shit.

So after this the team talked with our leader that we wanted to let her go and focus on the other guy who was going really well and some other junior devs who had joined the team.

But the HR found out that she had sued her last company, we don't know the reason, but HR guys were afraid of firing her without a careful firing process.

So now we're stuck with her in the team, and everything we ask her to do need to be remade, not because the code is bad, but because it NEVER works

And after all this I still ask myself, how did she finish college? Every person that i know that studied CS or CS like courses had a lot of OOP or at least knew what a class and a method were supposed to be.

ARGH. I wrote a long rant containing a bunch of gems from the codebase at @work, and lost it.

I'll summarize the few I remember.

First, the cliche:
if (x == true) { return true; } else { return false; };
Seriously written (more than once) by the "legendary" devs themselves.

Then, lots of typos in constants (and methods, and comments, and ...) like:
SMD_AGENT_SHCEDULE_XYZ = '5-year-old-typo'

and gems like:

def hot_garbage
magic = [nil, '']
magic = [0, nil] if something_something
success = other_method_that_returns_nothing(magic)
if success == true
return true # signal success
end
end

^ That one is from our glorious self-proclaimed leader / "engineering director" / the junior dev thundercunt on a power trip. Good stuff.

Next up are a few of my personal favorites:

Report.run_every 4.hours # Every 6 hours
Daemon.run_at_hour 6 # Daily at 8am

LANG_ENGLISH = :en
LANG_SPANISH = :sp # because fuck standards, right?

And for design decisions...

The code was supposed to support multiple currencies, but just disregards them and sets a hardcoded 'usd' instead -- and the system stores that string on literally hundreds of millions of records, often multiple times too (e.g. for payment, display fees, etc). and! AND! IT'S ALWAYS A FUCKING VARCHAR(255)! So a single payment record uses 768 bytes to store 'usd' 'usd' 'usd'

I'd mention the design decisions that led to the 35 second minimum pay API response time (often 55 sec), but i don't remember the details well enough.

Also:
The senior devs can get pretty much anything through code review. So can the dev accountants. and ... well, pretty much everyone else. Seriously, i have absolutely no idea how all of this shit managed to get published.

But speaking of code reviews: Some security holes are allowed through because (and i quote) "they already exist elsewhere in the codebase." You can't make this up.

Oh, and another!
In a feature that merges two user objects and all their data, there's a method to generate a unique ID. It concatenates 12 random numbers (one at a time, ofc) then checks the database to see if that id already exists. It tries this 20 times, and uses the first unique one... or falls through and uses its last attempt. This ofc leads to collisions, and those collisions are messy and require a db rollback to fix. gg. This was written by the "legendary" dev himself, replete with his signature single-letter variable names. I brought it up and he laughed it off, saying the collisions have been rare enough it doesn't really matter so he won't fix it.

Yep, it's garbage all the way down.

Ahem ahem.
*clears throat*

Front end bois, listen that carefully.
YOU DONT FUCKIN TELL THE BACKEND HOW TO ACCEPT REQUESTS.

Backend creates the fuckin methods, the parameters and the responses, AND YOU FUCKIN ADAPT TO IT.

This guy at my work, we are both from Uni but i picked backend because i suck at frontend and i like using backend languages, sends me a message and tells me he can't make the project work.

At this time i have almost finished my part, i have made the method, have checked that they work, and i closed the work computer.

And now he tells me he wants to make a GET request instead of POST. LISTEN HERE MOTHERFUCKER. The methods are ready, adapt to them and shut the fuck up.

And before you tell me some methods don't work, make fuckin sure your part is correct because if i boot up the work laptop again to check why the method you have told me doesn't work, and it still does the job it was intented to do but you can't fix your part, i will fuckin cut your throat.

Sucker.
I do my part, and have to study for uni exams, since you don't have to because you have passed them, do your self a favor and fuckin learn to do things.

It's not my fault that i got experience on my own while you were just only doing our uni retarded projects and didn't bother to learn anything on your own.

I don't mean by any needs that i'm better than you but fuckin accept that i have learned something else that you have not and i would like to share the knowledge with you since you didn't bother.

I have a junior who really drives me up a wall. He's been a junior for a couple of years now (since he started as an intern here).

He always looks for the quickest, cheapest, easiest solution he can possibly think of to all his tickets. Most of it pretty much just involves copy/pasting code that has similar functionality from elsewhere in the application, tweaking some variable names and calling it a day. And I mean, I'm not knocking copy/paste solutions at all, because that's a perfectly valid way of learning certain things, provided that one actually analyzes the code they are cloning, and actually modifies it in a way that solves the problem, and can potentially extend the ability to reuse the original code. This is rarely the case with this guy.

I've tried to gently encourage this person to take their time with things, and really put some thought into design with his solutions instead of rushing to finish; because ultimately all the time he spends on reworks could have been spent on doing it right the first time. Problem is, this guy is very stubborn, and gets very defensive when any sort of insinuation is made that he needs to improve on something. My advice to actually spend time analyzing how an interface was used, or how an extension method can be further extended before trying to brute-force your way through the problem seems to fall on deaf ears.

I always like to include my juniors on my pull requests; even though I pretty much have all final say in what gets merged, I like to encourage not only all devs be given thoughtful, constructive criticism, regardless of "rank" but also give them the opportunity to see how others write code and learn by asking questions, and analyzing why I approached the problem the way I did. It seems like this dev consistently uses this opportunity to get in as many public digs as he can on my work by going for the low-hanging fruit: "whitespace", "add comments, this code isn't self-documenting", and "an if/else here is more readable and consistent with this file than a ternary statement". Like dude, c'mon. Can you at least analyze the logic and see if it's sound? or perhaps offer a better way of doing something, or ask if the way I did something really makes sense?

Mid-Year reviews are due this week; I'm really struggling to find any way to document any sort of progress he's made. Once in a great while, he does surprise me and prove that he's capable of figuring out how something works and manage to use the mechanisms properly to solve a problem. At the very least he's productive (in terms of always working on assigned work). And because of this, he's likely safe from losing his job because the company considers him cheap labor. He is very underpaid, but also very under-qualified.

He's my most problematic junior; worst part is, he only has a job because of me: I wanted to give the benefit of the doubt when my boss asked me if we should extend an offer, as I thought it was only fair to give the opportunity to grow and prove himself like I was given. But I'm also starting to toe the line of being a good mentor by giving opportunities to learn, and falling behind on work because I could have just done it myself in a fraction of the time.

I hate managing people. I miss the days of code + spotify for 10 hours a day then going home.

My friend ask me what this method do?

Me : It's self explaning method bro ;)

Friend : doNothing() ???? 🤔🤔

!rant
I suddenly remembered that time when I was a junior, faced an issue in the code. I assign a parameter for a method for background-colour, where I have to declare a Colour value with the hexcode, then I got an error thrown at me. That's says Colour(); not found something something.

Took me one hour to realise most programming languages are American. Should be Color() not Colour()

Facepalm. That day I thought to me self, how stupid can I get in a day.

Nothing like writing summary comments on methods to make you feel smart. It's like:

<summary>
ObviousWellNamedMethod is a method that does obvious well named thing
</summary>
<param name="WellNamedObviousParameter">Represents the well named obvious thing used in the obvious well named method</param>

I hate coding standards sometimes.

OMFG. Here's a self-rant for you all...

So, working on a JS library to build widgets, I five across some weird behaviour where I expect `$.ajax.apply()` to pass something to the chained `.done()` method, but it comes out differently.

Fuck. Right, time to visit StackOverflow and glean some knowledge.

I post a question, complete with examples and descriptions and a little midget unicorn in the corner for world peace.

Come back a bit later to see what's happened, and nobody understands my damn question!

So I proceed to debate a few points with some other devs, going back and forth for a while, but still nobody knows what I'm asking.

Fuck. Time for a JSFiddle...

Copy code from the jQuery docs and start modifying it to show what I was working with... Now suddenly is all working as the docs say.

O.o

So I go look back at my own code again to try work out what's actually going on.

Turns out I completely missed MY OWN CODE.

Fuck me.

When I was in college OOP was emerging. A lot of the professors were against teaching it as the core. Some younger professors were adamant about it, and also Java fanatics. So after the bell rang, they'd sometimes teach people that wanted to learn it. I stayed after and the professor said that object oriented programming treated things like reality.

My first thought to this was hold up, modeling reality is hard and complicated, why would you want to add that to your programming that's utter madness.

Then he started with a ball example and how some balls in reality are blue, and they can have a bounce action we can express with a method.

My first thought was that this seems a very niche example. It has very little to do with any problems I have yet solved and I felt thinking about it this way would complicate my programs rather than make them simpler.

I looked around the at remnants of my classmates and saw several sitting forward, their eyes lit up and I felt like I was in a cult meeting where the head is trying to make everyone enamored of their personality. Except he wasn't selling himself, he was selling an idea.

I patiently waited it out, wanting there to be something of value in the after the bell lesson. Something I could use to better my own programming ability. It never came.

This same professor would tell us all to read and buy gang of four it would change our lives. It was an expensive hard cover book with a ribbon attached for a bookmark. It was made to look important. I didn't have much money in college but I gave it a shot I bought the book. I remember wrinkling my nose often, reading at it. Feeling like I was still being sold something. But where was the proof. It was all an argument from authority and I didn't think the argument was very good.

I left college thinking the whole thing was silly and would surely go away with time. And then it grew, and grew. It started to be impossible to avoid it. So I'd just use it when I had to and that became more and more often.

I began to doubt myself. Perhaps I was wrong, surely all these people using and loving this paradigm could not be wrong. I took on a 3 year project to dive deep into OOP later in my career. I was already intimately aware of OOP having to have done so much of it. But I caught up on all the latest ideas and practiced them for a the first year. I thought if OOP is so good I should be able to be more productive in years 2 and 3.

It was the most miserable I had ever been as a programmer. Everything took forever to do. There was boilerplate code everywhere. You didn't so much solve problems as stuff abstract ideas that had nothing to do with the problem everywhere and THEN code the actual part of the code that does a task. Even though I was working with an interpreted language they had added a need to compile, for dependency injection. What's next taking the benefit of dynamic typing and forcing typing into it? Oh I see they managed to do that too. At this point why not just use C or C++. It's going to do everything you wanted if you add compiling and typing and do it way faster at run time.

I talked to the client extensively about everything. We both agreed the project was untenable. We moved everything over another 3 years. His business is doing better than ever before now by several metrics. And I can be productive again. My self doubt was over. OOP is a complicated mess that drags down the software industry, little better than snake oil and full of empty promises. Unfortunately it is all some people know.

Now there is a functional movement, a data oriented movement, and things are looking a little brighter. However, no one seems to care for procedural. Functional and procedural are not that different. Functional just tries to put more constraints on the developer. Data oriented is also a lot more sensible, and again pretty close to procedural a lot of the time. It's just odd to me this need to separate from procedural at all. Procedural was very honest. If you're a bad programmer you make bad code. If you're a good programmer you make good code. It seems a lot of this was meant to enforce bad programmers to make good code. I'll tell you what I think though. I think that has never worked. It's just hidden it away in some abstraction and made identifying it harder. Much like the code methodologies themselves do to the code.

Now I'm left with a choice, keep my own business going to work on what I love, shift gears and do what I hate for more money, or pivot careers entirely. I decided after all this to go into data science because what you all are doing to the software industry sickens me. And that's my story. It's one that makes a lot of people defensive or even passive aggressive, to those people I say, try more things. At least then you can be less defensive about your opinion.

!Rant

TLDR: What's your favorite REST API Documentation tool?

I'm about to start developing a really large REST API. I have never really had need to document my previous API's since they were small, self explanatory and had only me using them. Aside from this one being too large for me to keep track of there is also a remote team that will need to integrate with it.

Basically I need write exceptional documentation while using as little time as possible. I love postman and am planning to use it for documentation since I currently use it to test during development anyway but I have seen some really neat looking tools like swagger and apiary so I figured I would check for some other suggestions.

What is your current / preferred REST API documentation method?

I don’t know if I would call it a quirk of the language or serious abuse of it :P

But I managed to get a null ref exception when comparing a local int variable to an int parameter to the same function in C#.

Since a local or parameter of type in cannot be null and I compared the variables them self and dud not try to access any property on them (and no extension method or implicit case or similar) my first thought, along with all colleagues that chipped in to help, was that this should not be possible.

Turns out the method was called through reflection and in that part it injected null as the base object to call the method on.

Since local variables actually are referenced through the parent object this was what was causing the null ref.

That took some time to figure out.

Interviewed for a Mid/Senior developer role and finally got feedback. The company feels I'm not experience enough for the senior role but think I'm a good fit for the company. Bad thing is they don't have any entry level positions available. I honestly feel like I am ready for a mid level role and maybe even a senior role. They say to keep considering them while they try to get approval for entry level position, but this is a massive company and who knows how long that will take. Recruiter said it's not a no, just not a right now. /:

Oh and going off my last rant, I found out that the senior dev was wrong about set interception being '|' in python, I found out that it's actually a method called interception(set). So even the senior dev didn't know off the top of his head. /:

Have some projects in GitHub but my biggest one is a private repo I'm doing the entire backend and even frontend. Can't share that repo or share details because it's a project a friend (his idea) and I are planning on releasing. (:

Overall feeling pretty bummed because I was looking forward to steady work that'll improve my skills even further... I'm self taught so it's a bit tougher to land interviews because of the automated process most companies have with resume filtering. ):

Going to keep doing small contracted projects until I land another interview. In the meantime trying to keep my spirit up. (:

my fist job... i get to edit a c++ code written by a (mind you) programming company that they teamed with for the past(mind you again) 3 years ...
now just for starters, this code was edited by self taught coders that are really good engineers(they are really good), that didnt really know how the code worked before yet they still changed it, and it worked, how ever they wanted some changes.
i get the project files, and there is not one single comment describing what is happening... only code commented out... and no documentation what so ever were done....
so below are some of my comments that i wrote after i finished adding what i had to add, and fixing what i had to fix:

/*first rule of C anything coding, no actual functions in the header, well let me introduce you to a fully functioning thread running program all in the header, enjoy*/

//used to control the thread
// i honestly dont know why, but it worked soooooo yea...

// TG uncommented // for absolutely no reason what so ever...

//used to communicate with the port

//the message to be sent to the inverter, which has a code that will handle it
//hmmmmmm...

//again not usefull since we are using radioButtons
// same ...
// same ...
// same ...
// they said they dont even use this mode, but none the less, same ...
// calculate the checksum for the message
// ....
// one of the things that work, and god forbids i touch
// used for the status displayed on screen
// used for the (censored :P) status in the message
// used for the (censored :P) status in the message
// not used at all, but the message structure contains it and i refuse to edit that abomination
// used for the (censored :P) status in the message
// used for the (censored :P) status in the message
// just dont ask and roll with it, i didnt want to touch this
// saaaaame ...
// if before true this saaaaaame ...
// value of the (censored :P)
// it pains me to say it again, but this is no use
// (censored :P) input
// (censored :P) input
// only place seen , like for real it was just defined,sooooo yea :D
// well you know how it is
// message string
// check sum string
/****below from feed back****/
// (censored :P) coming in
// (censored :P) coming in
// (censored :P) coming in
// (censored :P)
/****below is the output to the receiver ****/
//(censored :P)
// (censored :P)
// (censored :P)
// (censored :P)
//you thought we were done.... nope, no idea. it comes in the feedback
// not used, literally commented out the one time it was used
// same ...
// XD, man this is a blast, same ...
// nope ...
// used to store the port chosen for the communication
// is a static for the number of data we have recorded so far, and as a row indicator for the recording method
// used to indicate the page we are on in the excel file, as well as the point in physical point in the test
// same ... oh look at this a positive same :D
// same ...
// same ...

This is gonna be a long post, and inevitably DR will mutilate my line breaks, so bear with me.
Also I cut out a bunch because the length was overlimit, so I'll post the second half later.

I'm annoyed because it appears the current stablediffusion trend has thrown the baby out with the bath water. I'll explain that in a moment.

As you all know I like to make extraordinary claims with little proof, sometimes
for shits and giggles, and sometimes because I'm just delusional apparently.

One of my legit 'claims to fame' is, on the theoretical level, I predicted
most of the developments in AI over the last 10+ years, down to key insights.
I've never had the math background for it, but I understood the ideas I
was working with at a conceptual level. Part of this flowed from powering
through literal (god I hate that word) hundreds of research papers a year, because I'm an obsessive like that. And I had to power through them, because
a lot of the technical low-level details were beyond my reach, but architecturally
I started to see a lot of patterns, and begin to grasp the general thrust
of where research and development *needed* to go.

In any case, I'm looking at stablediffusion and what occurs to me is that we've almost entirely thrown out GANs. As some or most of you may know, a GAN is
where networks compete, one to generate outputs that look real, another
to discern which is real, and by the process of competition, improve the ability
to generate a convincing fake, and to discern one. Imagine a self-sharpening knife and you get the idea.

Well, when we went to the diffusion method, upscaling noise (essentially a form of controlled pareidolia using autoencoders over seq2seq models) we threw out
GANs.

We also threw out online learning. The models only grow on the backend.
This doesn't help anyone but those corporations that have massive funding
to create and train models. They get to decide how the models 'think', what their
biases are, and what topics or subjects they cover. This is no good long run,
but thats more of an ideological argument. Thats not the real problem.
The problem is they've once again gimped the research, chosen a suboptimal
trap for the direction of development.

What interested me early on in the lottery ticket theory was the implications.
The lottery ticket theory says that, part of the reason *some* RANDOM initializations of a network train/predict better than others, is essentially
down to a small pool of subgraphs that happened, by pure luck, to chance on
initialization that just so happened to be the right 'lottery numbers' as it were, for training quickly.

The first implication of this, is that the bigger a network therefore, the greater the chance of these lucky subgraphs occurring. Whether the density grows
faster than the density of the 'unlucky' or average subgraphs, is another matter.
From this though, they realized what they could do was search out these subgraphs, and prune many of the worst or average performing neighbor graphs, without meaningful loss in model performance. Essentially they could *shrink down* things like chatGPT and BERT.

The second implication was more sublte and overlooked, and still is.
The existence of lucky subnetworks might suggest nothing additional--In which case the implication is that *any* subnet could *technically*, by transfer learning, be 'lucky' and train fast or be particularly good for some unknown task.

INSTEAD however, what has happened is we haven't really seen that. What this means is actually pretty startling. It has two possible implications, either of which will have significant outcomes on the research sooner or later:
1. there is an 'island' of network size, beyond what we've currently achieved,
where networks that are currently state of the3 art at some things, rapidly converge to state-of-the-art *generalists* in nearly *all* task, regardless of input. What this would look like at first, is a gradual drop off in gains of the current approach, characterized as a potential new "ai winter", or a "limit to the current approach", which wouldn't actually be the limit, but a saddle point in its utility across domains and its intelligence (for some measure and definition of 'intelligence').

I coded a simple Java programme when I was a beginner, today I reviewing it. I facepalm myself and thinking "I wish I know about 3 tier Architecture software development earlier" . Now I am looking at a one tier Architecture programme.

Which means UI components, Logic Components and Database components are all in ONE class and one method. Omg. Silly past self...

Lua users, have you used moonscript?

It's a little language that has it's own interpreter or can be compiled down to Lua and it's absolutely lovely (currently using it with Love2d).

Of course, as with most things, what I love about it also royally pisses me off sometimes.

For starters local has to be declared for variables, unlike lua.
Otherwise the variable goes to _
Also note, that some tutorials literally tell you the opposite.

all variables are local by default
unless you don't declare them
then they go to _ (throwaway)
Some tutorials get this wrong too.

all variables have to be declared local
except tables. failure to declare a table WITHOUT a local will cause things like
table.insert to fail with "nil" values for no god damn reason.
No tutorial I could find mentioned this.

Did you know we call methods with '\'?
By the way, we call methods with '\'.
Why? Who the fuck knows.
Does make writing web routes more natural though.

Variables in the parameters of new are declared and bound for you. Would have loved to know this before hand instead of trying
to bind to them like a fucking idiot.

Fat arrows are used to pass in self for methods.
Unless you're calling a method. Then you use backwards slash. This fact is unhelpful when you're a beginner and dealing with the differences between the *other* arrow, the backslash, the fat arrow, and the fact that functions can be called with or WITHOUT parenthesis.
And on that note..

While learning all this other shit, don't forget parenthesis are optional!
Except when they're not!
..Like when you have a function call among your arguments and have to disambiguate which args belong to the outer call and to the inner call! Why not just be fucking consistent?

But on the plus size, ":" is now used for what it should have been used for in the fucking beginning: binding values to keys.
And on the downside, it's in a language thats built on top of another language that uses it for fucking *method calls*, a completely
different fucking usage.

And better still, to add to that brainfuckery thats lost in the mental translational noise like static on a fucking dialup modem, you define methods with the fat arrow. Wait, was that the single arrow or fat one? Yeah the fat one. Fuck. But not before you do THIS shit..

someShit: =>

yeah, you STILL include the god damn colon just so when you're coming from lua you can do a mental double take. "Why am I passing self twice? Oh right, because fuck me, I decided to use moonscript." It's consistent on that front but it also pisses me off.

A lot of these are actually quality of life improvements disguised as gotchas, but when you're two beers in to a 30 minute headscratcher it sure doesn't fucking feel like it.

Nevertheless, once I moved beyond the gotchas, it was like night and day. Sure moonscripts takes a giant steaming dump all over the lua output, like a schizophrenic alcoholic athena from the head of zeus, but god damn, when it works it just WORKS.

Locals that act like locals? Check.
Sane OOP? Check.
Classes, constructors, easy access to class methods, iterators? Check, check, check, check, check.

I fucking hate ceremony. Configuration over convention is for cunts. And moonscript goes a long ways toward making lua less cunty.
If you've ever felt this way while using lua, please, give moonscript a try.

You'll regret it, but in a good way!

We have all experienced inheriting a project and crying because of quality of coding. Somehow the project works but you can't explain how.

I guess I will not blame the previous developer. I guess in most cases it's the teacher who teaches that horrible method of coding.

I may be a self taught developer. But I can gladly say that I know how to code. However I can't say the same about my professor. Who makes you add percentage based margins and paddings (CSS) And make a fluid layout calling it responsive.

Fuck you Professor.

I am working on an AoK bot. It worked before but now it fails on me. It says: {'success': False, 'error': 'Invalid comment.'}

I don't know why.

This is the comment: "@retoor debugsemiss everything and nave the and resorts they're not paying much to clean a fucking roomic lolg creating of my phoprooting such is the quoting this kidle... Noh ot inuforian times fined the apposivy suistlondlan't by imprymarbygind. Metwary nate ?"

Call method:
```
async def post_comment(self, rant_id, text):
payload = dict(
rant_id=rant_id,
comment=text
)
payload.update(self.auth_params)
async with self.session.post(f'/api/devrant/rants/{rant_id}/comments',data=payload, params=self.auth_params) as resp:
print(await resp.json())
```

Someone has an idea why it's failing? Also tried it with hardcored rant_id and message.

I'm going to confess: I am the type of developer that creates the ExcruciatinglyLongAndSpecificClassNameObject with the UtterlyDetailedExplanationMethod. It's just a thing I keep doing, despite voiced frustrations from people I've worked with. It just feels right in the mindset of self-documenting code

And while I acknowledge this isn't a flawless process, I see no other way around without losing information. I've tried alternatives, but everything feels like trading one issue for another:

- Abbreviations work as long as they are well known (XML, HTML, ...). As soon as you add your own (even if they make sense in the business context) you can bet your ass someone is going to have no idea what you're talking about. Even remembering your own shit is difficult after X months.

- Removing redundant naming seems fine until it isn't redundant anymore (like when a feature with similar traits gets added). and you can bet your ass no-one is going to refactor the existing part to specify how it differs from the newly added stuff.

- Moving details to namespaces is IMO just moving the problem and pretending it doesn't exist. Also have had folks that just auto-include namespaces in VS without looking if they need the class from namespaceA or namespaceB and then proceed to complain why it doesn't compile.

So, since I am out of ideas, I'd like to ask you folks: Is it possible to reduce class/method name lengths without losing information? Or is self-documenting code just an ideal I'm trying too hard to achieve? Or are long names not a problem at all? I'm looking forward to your answers.

Every once in a while the flexibility of dynamic types comes back and bites you in the ars:

So I created method that returns the date significance (day, month, year) or null when no date is set.
I chose a class constant DAY with the value 0.
This is not a problem in if statements as I always use === but in this case a switch made more sense. And as you can guess no date set (NULL) was handled in the self::DAY (0) case... 😐😑😶 Silently resulting in wrong results when no date is given! #£#@$& (and other comic swearing symbols)

Even though php7 finally has decent type hinting resulting in much clearer defined API's we can still go very wrong.
More love to Go for less verbose static typing! To bad we can rarely use it at the office 😥

I started Aeronautical Engeneering (yes I know, but I love Aviation). In second semester I saw Basic Programming, and then I realized that I had an ability in programming (comparing to my other fellows).

In third semester I was in "Static" class (vectors and a lot of physics) and I thought: "WTF am doing here, I don't know what can I do with a vector in real life." So I decided to switch to Systems Engeneering in other university (I think it had been always in my blood haha).

I saw one semester and this happened: I loved the career, but the university had an old-educational method that i hated. So i moved to another university, and I'm currently finishing at distance.

I'm just tired of university. I realized that the university is about 30%. The other 70% is experience (and of course a little from Stack Overflow hahaha).

Now, thanks to a lot of Google research and experience in various self projects, I'm here in Brazil working as a Web Developer.

I've learned 1000% more here than in the university.

And that's my short-four-years-story

Let me rant! I don’t usually do this but this is just frustrating and draining. Please tell me if im wrong. We have authentication that needs to be refactored. I was assigned on this issue. Im a junior btw. I also attached an image of my proposals. The issue of the old way of our signup process is that when validation fails they will keep on accepting the TaC (terms and conditions) and on our create method we have the validation and creating the user. Basically if User.create(user_params) create else throw invalid end. (Imma take a photo later and show it you)which needs to be refactored. So I created a proposal 1. On my first proposal I could create a middleware to check if the body is correct or valid if its valid show the TaCs and if they accept thats the moment the user is created. There is also additional delete user because DoE told me that we dont need middlewares we have before and after hooks! (I wanted to puke here clearly he doesn’t understand the request and response cycle and separation of concerns) anyway, so if middleware is not accepted then i have to delete the user if they dont accept the TaCs. Proposal 2. If they dont want me to touch the create method i could just show the TaCs and if they dont accept then redirect if they do then show form and do the sign process.

This whats weird (weird because he has a lot of experience and has master or phd) he proposes to create a method called validate (this method is in the same controller as the create, i think hes thinking about hooks) call it first and if it fails then response with error and dont save user, heres the a weird part again he wants me to manually check on each entity. Like User.find_by_email(bs@g.com) something like that and on my mind wtf. Isnt it the same as User.create(user_params) because this will return false if paras are invalid?? (I might be wrong here)

This is not the first time though He proposes solutions that are complex, inefficient, unmaintainable. And i think he doesnt understand ruby on rails or webdev in particular. This the first time i complained or I never complained because im thinking im just a junior and he hs more experience and has a higher degree. This is mot the case here though. I guess not all person who has a higher degree are right. To all self thought and bachelors im telling you not all people who went to prestige university and has a higher degree are correct and right all the time. Anyway ill continue later and do what he says. Let me know if im wrong please. Thanks

Working with a data scientist on an update to a machine learning api that has dinner logic change with a new model.

He's wondering why his PRs are falling.

He's trying to merge into development from a branch created off of main.

He's renamed all the functions and classes and never updated the call points.

He's using new packages but never includes them in the requirements file, so the docket builds are failing.

His class method definitions don't contain self and are throwing syntax errors.

I've been working with him for 4 days to get him to understand branching, linting, unit testing, and not blindly copy and pasting snippets from jupyter notebook into production api code!

I need to add new feature into the program which I wrote years ago so I start digging up the source code. The project is written in a language which I no longer code in.

That code is really poorly written with most of them don't have tests. I also find out that previous self is really a genius since he can keep track of huge project with almost no documentation.

To make matter worst, there are unused components (class,feature) in the source code. "Current me" have a policy of "just adding only a feature you need and remove unused feature" but it seem the "previous me" don't agree with the "current me".

The previous me also have the habit of using writing insane logic. I can remember what particular class and methods is doing but I can't figure out the details.

For example one method only have 5 line of code but it is very hard to figure out what those do.

The saving grace is that he know the important for method signature and using immutable data structure everywhere.

I was under the influence of caffeine and have a constant sleep deprivation at the time (only sleeping about 4 hour every day) so I can't blame him too hard.

I can't blame him too hard, right?

Could someone invent a time machine already? Invent time machine not to save the world but to save the developers from himself.

Another great website error code fail (dumped its full error output to the website):
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/trac/web/api.py", line 436, in send_error
data, 'text/html')
File "/usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/trac/web/chrome.py", line 808, in render_template
template = self.load_template(filename, method=method)
File "/usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/trac/web/chrome.py", line 768, in load_template
self.templates = TemplateLoader(
File "/usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/trac/web/chrome.py", line 481, in get_all_templates_dirs
for provider in self.template_providers:
File "/usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/trac/core.py", line 78, in extensions
return filter(None, [component.compmgr[cls] for cls in extensions])
File "/usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/trac/core.py", line 213, in __getitem__
component = cls(self)
File "/usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/trac/core.py", line 119, in maybe_init
init(self)
File "/usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/authopenid/authopenid.py", line 157, in __init__
db = self.env.get_db_cnx()
File "/usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/trac/env.py", line 335, in get_db_cnx
return get_read_db(self)
File "/usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/trac/db/api.py", line 90, in get_read_db
return _transaction_local.db or DatabaseManager(env).get_connection()
File "/usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/trac/db/api.py", line 152, in get_connection
return self._cnx_pool.get_cnx(self.timeout or None)
File "/usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/trac/db/pool.py", line 172, in get_cnx
return _backend.get_cnx(self._connector, self._kwargs, timeout)
File "/usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/trac/db/pool.py", line 105, in get_cnx
cnx = connector.get_connection(**kwargs)
File "/usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/trac/db/sqlite_backend.py", line 180, in get_connection
return SQLiteConnection(path, log, params)
File "/usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/trac/db/sqlite_backend.py", line 255, in __init__
user=getuser(), path=path))
TracError: The user apache requires read _and_ write permissions to the database file /home/trac/morituri/db/trac.db and the directory it is located in.

My teacher was shit, no experience, no knowledge, no nothing... Although I stil maintain that self taught is a valid method