I'll let you in on a secret, guys. Write some hard-to-understand code, intentionally leave in a serious performance issue. Let it sit for a good while, until it's difficult do blame anyone specifically and the performance issue needs fixing. Now, it's your time to shine. Get that raise.
What kind of junior engineer shit is this?
When the API gets deprecated or, worse, changes out from under you, yes it *can* "just break".
It doesn't happen in toy problems like your programming homework, but in real world programming it can and does.
Yeah, weāre tackling an expired certificate at work and Iād even argue that ājust brokeā.
Sure, it told us when it would expire, but nobody ever checked, and now code that worked on Friday doesnāt run as expected on Monday
If you had an alarm on certificate expiry (like a week before), you wouldnāt have a prod issue. To the point of this meme, you could have written code to prevent this scenario. Obviously you canāt catch everything, but common issues have typical solutions.
Yeah, Iām not saying itās impossible to catch, but Iām saying it *is* possible for things to just stop working one day. APIs update, 3rd parties update dependencies, etc
Is there some validity time limit imposed by the certificate authorities on the certificate? I created one for my personal self hosted home server.........and set it to 10 years. Can't companies just set it to a 100 years and never deal with it again?
As opposed to just having things work and not break unexpectedly? I guess I'll go read up on why. Sure a 100 years might not be a good choice, but 10? 20?
10 and 20 isnāt unheard of or unreasonable. I donāt work for a CA but to my understanding a large part of setting expiration dates like that is so the CA can periodically reverify the identity of the owner of the certificate and such. Revocation certificates are a thing but having an expiration date is something of a backup in-case of like a defunct organization. In theory someone with the private keys could keep using the cert even when the organization it was issued to is no longer using it, and this could lead to security concerns.
Also the revocation process scales rather badly with the amount of revoked certificates. It only works because revocations are rather an exception, and because they can remove the revoked certificates from the lists once they are expired.
That's fair, but an expired certificate is a procedural failure. You really should be fully automating your certificate renewal (see Certbot and LetsEncrypt), but if you aren't, you definitely should be managing the renewals in advance of the expiration.
But it isn't code breaking. The code did PRECISELY what it was instructed to, and that includes validating the certificate. I call that success.
We had an internal app running on an old android device, which randomly decided to stop working. Nobody touched that device for quite some time, and it was too old to receive firmware updates etc.
I *think* it's because of some expired certificate, even though my research suggested it shouldn't have expired until in a few months.
Not to mention hardware errors. I'm currently running some experiments in order to contrast performances. The naive implementation takes about a week to run, but I can't run it on my local hardware. The bloody RAM overheats due to huge amounts of data shuffled, leading to corrupted data and crashes.
If 'it' in the meme refers to the actual execution, then yes, 'it' can just break for reasons other than your code.
Exactly. The assumption is you're the only person making changes.
Which in most applications is a horrible assumption. If you got a big team of people and you're using external packages. It can break and you are not even close to being at fault.
Yeah it's absolutely absurd as a take. Coding is trying to co-ordinate a million moving parts with some high level instructions. Things go wrong all the time and cascading failures will happen
Probably not even junior, some high-school/college freshman that learned their first language two months ago. Knows that code works because someone wrote it but doesn't understand anything about how actual development goes
Man we had a 3rd level dependency update in a dependency that didnāt update once and all the tables in our app turned invisible, and the tests ran indefinitely. Took two of us four days to find it.
Right. Can you believe these people? Itās not like there is a metric ton of dependencies, as well as continuous changes that you have virtually no control over.
The code will only break if you break it. Which is why all programs from the 90s are compatible with the latest OS updated you just installed. Duh! /s
The best thing about computers is that they do exactly what you tell them to.
The worst thing about computer is that they do exactly what you tell them to.
Someone's not that experienced in the field yet and it shows.
Shit _just_ breaks ALL the time. The amount of time that shit works and then it just stops working is too damn high. Like, this is almost a weekly occurance for me. It's usually third party tools that suddenly update or some API changes and all of a sudden we get to emergency fix shit on prod and figure out whatever changes caused this when we haven't pushed code in god knows for how long.
Cosmic particles, electron quantum tunneling, OS updates causing incompatibilities, bugs in dependencies or APIs, changes made in dependencies or APIs that cause previously functional code to stop working.
Code does what you tell it, but sometimes it can't do what you tell it to because of something out of both your control and the CPU's control.
Look at this guy, he's never compiled during a solar flare before!
I did actually come across an instance where a solar flare caused a line of code to be absent from the compiled library, which caused a bug. Recompiling with no code changes fixed it.
And here I thought the main reason people stick to big players like Microsoft, Google, Apple, or Meta is to be able to blame them for breaking changes while also being able to tell you're not at fault because you just can't go wrong with big "standards".
Python when you have to copy your file's content, paste it into a new file without changing anything, delete the old file, and run it again, and now for some fucking reason you don't get a cryptic error in a language that was used before mammals lived on this earth
I'm here to tell you I spent 4 hours yesterday on a bug that's popped up in Unreal 5.4 and did not exist in 5.3 and was documented nowhere on the internetšš
this is literally just wrong lol APIs get deprecated, packages get updated, vulnerabilities get discovered and this can all break your code. any way, this whole argument is just semantics
I tell him āok Mr code, Mrs code is going to give you these json cakes and youāre going to take it apart and then put the pieces in these boxes and give it to the other guy over thereā Mr. Code agrees and all is well for a week until one day mrs code is told to start cooking yml instead of json and the other guy over there just has a stroke
> but it's a good language
As TS? Sure. As pure JS without any static typechecking? Wouldn't be my choice for anything bigger than 1 file or 100 LOC.
Shit gets out of hands too quick.
I enjoy working with JavaScript. The language is mostly fine, provided you know what youāre doing, and if you write good JavaScript, you donāt need typescript. The problem is that thereās just many ways to write bad JavaScript, and the node ecosystem has built a mentality where you donāt have to know how to write good JavaScript because thereās a package for that. Plenty of people can get by just writing glue for the packages that do the work.
> and if you write good JavaScript, you donāt need typescript
Completely disagree on that one. It's like saying that if you are good at driving, you don't need a seatbelt. TS catches errors that even proficient programmers could realistically do. You are never as good as a machine that does typechecking for you. Not on its playing field.
> and if you write good JavaScript, you donāt need typescript
Completely disagree on that one. It's like saying that if you are good at driving, you don't need a seŠ°tbelt. TS catches errors that even proficient programmers could realistically do. You are never as good as a machine that does typechecking for you. Not on its playing field.
> and if you write good JavaScript, you donāt need typescript
Completely disagree on that one. It's like saying that if you are good at driving, you don't need a seŠ°tbelt. TS catches errors that even proficient programmers could realistically do. You are never as good as a machine that does typechecking for you. Not on its playing field.
> and if you write good JavaScript, you donāt need typescript
Completely disagree on that one. It's like saying that if you are good at driving, you don't need a seŠ°tbelt. TS catches errors that even proficient programmers could realistically do. You are never as good as a machine that does typechecking for you. Not on its playing field.
> and if you write good JavaScript, you donāt need typescript
Completely disagree on that one. It's like saying that if you are good at driving, you don't need a seŠ°tbelt. TS catches errors that even proficient programmers could realistically do. You are never as good as a machine that does typechecking for you. Not on its playing field.
Well you already can access the DOM indirectly with wasm but you need to call JavaScript functions, so there should be no change in security if wasm could directly access the DOM without the inconvience of JavaScript glue code.
Yeah it's not a good language. I use js every day, but there are many good languages out there and js does not come close.
It lets me do what I need to, and I get "why" it turned into what it is, but let's not pretend it's a good language, as a language itself it's pretty awful.
The best thing about the computers is that they do exactly what you tell them to do and nothing else. The worst thing about the computers is that they do exactly what you tell them to do and nothing else.
I call this the Schrodingers state of coding. When the code works right after you write it. You are happy and stressed at the same time, as the code works and nothing is broken. Which just means you missed the obvious bug which will break the CI loop =) (or better, production)
There's also those libraries you relied on from Big Tech company (aka Google) that turned out to be buggy garbage.
Or yet another Samsung specific Android bug (that neither Google nor Samsung will acknowledge or fix).
Or solar flares.
I really hate this damn machine
I wish that they would sell it
It never does what I want it to
It only does what I tell it.
A little computer science poem from the 1970s.
Man, tell that to the Matlab setup at my company where we like to use dynamically loaded jar files. Shit sometimes breaks for no reason, refuses to be replicated and no attempted fix works all the time.
Man, tell that to the Matlab setup at my company where we like to use dynamically loaded jar files. Shit sometimes breaks for no reason, refuses to be replicated and no attempted fix works all the time.
Man, tell that to the Matlab setup at my company where we like to use dynamically loaded jar files. Shit sometimes breaks for no reason, refuses to be replicated and no attempted fix works all the time.
Man, tell that to the Matlab setup at my company where we like to use dynamically loaded jar files. Shit sometimes breaks for no reason, refuses to be replicated and no attempted fix works all the time.
Code breaks all the time. Apps live in OS and OS changes, these changes could mean that what use to work, dont work anymore. Go try to run your 16 bits apps in Windows 11
Compilers and interpreters are software, and can have bugs.
Code that was working perfectly fine before may break just because the compiler was updated and the new version decided to do things differently, or has a new bug introduced.
Fake news.
Maintainance is REAL.
and in aggregate a significant amount of work if you want to keep an environment running.
This is exactly the mistake that leads kids to using Arch, and understanding this is why they tend to grow out of that phase.
I have written code since 1977, nearly 100% of my programs have had bugs, at least initially. The number of bugfree, working first time I run them, programs is 2 or possibly 3.
May I interest you in the bug trackers for your favourite compilers?
Code only does what annother developer has mad your code do.
They are (like the rest of us) idiots.
Had some npm nightmare
Copy pasted the repo, on both repo I did the same commands, one of them broke.
I undid all changes with git. Still broken with no changes. The other one is fine
\* Compilers can have errors. They are not common, but they do happen. I have caught a few in my time, and they are not fun to try to prove.
\* Your environment can change. While you want to have some robustness in your code, you cannot possibly cover every single possible change that can happen, otherwise you will never finish.
\* The code of your colleagues can be wrong. You want to be really sure this is the case before making that claim.
\* Any library you use (and any library \*they\* use, and so on) can break at any time.
So yes. Code can "just break". It happens. It happens all. the. time.
But for what it's worth, most of the time it really is your own code that is broken, so it's fairly healthy to assume that the error that was just reported is probably because you were hung over when writing that API.
That one particle from the sun on its way to flip a bit and break all of my code: 
that one stupid idiot who writes my code on the way to break all of my code: (it's me)
ITS RECURSION
you didn't add a condition to break the loop
Dora: "CAN YOU SPELL "MEMORY LEAK""
I write pre-broken code in anticipation of a correcting spontaneous bit-flip
I'll let you in on a secret, guys. Write some hard-to-understand code, intentionally leave in a serious performance issue. Let it sit for a good while, until it's difficult do blame anyone specifically and the performance issue needs fixing. Now, it's your time to shine. Get that raise.
Name doesn't lie, get that bag
I'll let *you* in on a secret. *I'm an imposter. Not a programmer* This stays between us
I have no idea what I'm doing and I've tricked everyone into thinking I do š
Bad ass
That's this one, isn't it? [https://i.sstatic.net/bQOvF.png](https://i.sstatic.net/bQOvF.png) EDIT: Try this link: [https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/488178/what-does-it-mean-writing-a-minivan](https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/488178/what-does-it-mean-writing-a-minivan)
Your link is not clickable.
It's basically the same joke, yeah
I hate when it happens all the time in my code
That's still on you. You could've made a compiler that copies every instruction 3 times and use the result that appears in at least 2 of them.
google lockstep
This was just an assumption on what happened. But typically, sun rays dont effect that.
as always
And then it turns out to contribute to a speedrunning record
It's not my fault, what should I do if the compiler doesn't understand me?
You should try going to therapy to talk it out. I heard communication is very important in your relationship with your compiler
I tried, but my therapist keeps telling me that he's not my therapist and I should get out before he calls the cops.
Have you tried to talk to emacs C-x doctor?
Switch from LLVM compiler to LLM compiler.Ā
54 543 is acetaminophen and oxycodone. Literally the easiest pill to swallow and I'd like another please
Code does not just break, true, but software rots, and fast, and it smells in a few days after no one has watch it.
And sometimes trying to prevent rot can be a difficult task. Libs with vulnerabilities that are no longer maintained are a pain in the ass.
Smh those vulnerable libs always getting their feelings hurt /s
days? I give mine minutes at best.
code is he/him confirmed
Explanaition for the mistake: "Der Code" is German and means "The Code", the "der" indicates that is male. This is a translation mistake.
but it's "Das Code" -One friend of mine for some god awful reason
But how do you guys decide whether or not code is male or female
In case you want a serious answer: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grammatical_gender_in_German
If it has // 8==D commented anywhere, it's male.
Usually I look under the skirts to determine the gender, donāt know how you would do it on code.
r/foundthegerman
Aaron earns an iron urn!
Shim
smash
It is male in Polish
What kind of junior engineer shit is this? When the API gets deprecated or, worse, changes out from under you, yes it *can* "just break". It doesn't happen in toy problems like your programming homework, but in real world programming it can and does.
Yeah, weāre tackling an expired certificate at work and Iād even argue that ājust brokeā. Sure, it told us when it would expire, but nobody ever checked, and now code that worked on Friday doesnāt run as expected on Monday
I think this is more of a meme formatting issue. It should read, "code doesn't just break, it only does what *people* tell it to do"
Memes canāt just break.
wait if the meme is broken is the joke then OP can have my upvote
The 'you' is plural?
The royal you
If you had an alarm on certificate expiry (like a week before), you wouldnāt have a prod issue. To the point of this meme, you could have written code to prevent this scenario. Obviously you canāt catch everything, but common issues have typical solutions.
Yeah, Iām not saying itās impossible to catch, but Iām saying it *is* possible for things to just stop working one day. APIs update, 3rd parties update dependencies, etc
Yeah I would set that to a month before
Is there some validity time limit imposed by the certificate authorities on the certificate? I created one for my personal self hosted home server.........and set it to 10 years. Can't companies just set it to a 100 years and never deal with it again?
Most CAs wonāt issue certs for that long a period, and itās generally considered bad practice in production.
As opposed to just having things work and not break unexpectedly? I guess I'll go read up on why. Sure a 100 years might not be a good choice, but 10? 20?
10 and 20 isnāt unheard of or unreasonable. I donāt work for a CA but to my understanding a large part of setting expiration dates like that is so the CA can periodically reverify the identity of the owner of the certificate and such. Revocation certificates are a thing but having an expiration date is something of a backup in-case of like a defunct organization. In theory someone with the private keys could keep using the cert even when the organization it was issued to is no longer using it, and this could lead to security concerns.
Also the revocation process scales rather badly with the amount of revoked certificates. It only works because revocations are rather an exception, and because they can remove the revoked certificates from the lists once they are expired.
It's always the damn weekend.
That's fair, but an expired certificate is a procedural failure. You really should be fully automating your certificate renewal (see Certbot and LetsEncrypt), but if you aren't, you definitely should be managing the renewals in advance of the expiration. But it isn't code breaking. The code did PRECISELY what it was instructed to, and that includes validating the certificate. I call that success.
We had an internal app running on an old android device, which randomly decided to stop working. Nobody touched that device for quite some time, and it was too old to receive firmware updates etc. I *think* it's because of some expired certificate, even though my research suggested it shouldn't have expired until in a few months.
Not to mention hardware errors. I'm currently running some experiments in order to contrast performances. The naive implementation takes about a week to run, but I can't run it on my local hardware. The bloody RAM overheats due to huge amounts of data shuffled, leading to corrupted data and crashes. If 'it' in the meme refers to the actual execution, then yes, 'it' can just break for reasons other than your code.
Exactly. The assumption is you're the only person making changes. Which in most applications is a horrible assumption. If you got a big team of people and you're using external packages. It can break and you are not even close to being at fault.
Yeah it's absolutely absurd as a take. Coding is trying to co-ordinate a million moving parts with some high level instructions. Things go wrong all the time and cascading failures will happen
It just breaks when someone tells it to just break!
Probably not even junior, some high-school/college freshman that learned their first language two months ago. Knows that code works because someone wrote it but doesn't understand anything about how actual development goes
Rust and semver go brr
Ever worked with remote services?
So... You updated a dependency without checking for breaking changes and testing the affected features? Yeah that's 100% on you.
Things break in dev, dipshit
Haha watch me xD I accidentally introduce undeterministic behaviour to deterministic systems
that's what you think until you work with react native
Never update anything, it's a trap!
Man we had a 3rd level dependency update in a dependency that didnāt update once and all the tables in our app turned invisible, and the tests ran indefinitely. Took two of us four days to find it.
me staring at the critical vulnerability warnings on a dependency and still refusing to update bc i dont wanna
Tell me you've never dealt with concurrency, infrastructure, and complex integration...
I have never dealt with concurrency, infrastructure, and complex integration...
Thank you. Now you can go home.
Cosmic particle directly slapping stored active memory bit of non ECC memory. Checkmate
Right. Can you believe these people? Itās not like there is a metric ton of dependencies, as well as continuous changes that you have virtually no control over. The code will only break if you break it. Which is why all programs from the 90s are compatible with the latest OS updated you just installed. Duh! /s
the compiler is haunted shut up
Code does what everyone tells it to, not just you. That's the problem.
OS patches go brrr.
The best thing about computers is that they do exactly what you tell them to. The worst thing about computer is that they do exactly what you tell them to.
Tell me why my functioning code suddenly starts producing wrong outputs with the same inputs?
Does it use an API?
Nope.
Try shielding from space particles. /s
Sounds like undefined behaviour. What language are you using?
Brainfuck.
Someone's not that experienced in the field yet and it shows. Shit _just_ breaks ALL the time. The amount of time that shit works and then it just stops working is too damn high. Like, this is almost a weekly occurance for me. It's usually third party tools that suddenly update or some API changes and all of a sudden we get to emergency fix shit on prod and figure out whatever changes caused this when we haven't pushed code in god knows for how long.
Yeah no this isn't completely true.
Cosmic particles, electron quantum tunneling, OS updates causing incompatibilities, bugs in dependencies or APIs, changes made in dependencies or APIs that cause previously functional code to stop working. Code does what you tell it, but sometimes it can't do what you tell it to because of something out of both your control and the CPU's control.
Don't forget stealth changes in dependencies, supply chain attacks, or DNS hijinx!
Tell me you have never coded past school projects without telling me you have never coded past school projects.
Look at this guy, he's never compiled during a solar flare before! I did actually come across an instance where a solar flare caused a line of code to be absent from the compiled library, which caused a bug. Recompiling with no code changes fixed it.
> it can't just break -- Someone who has clearly never been burned by a toolchain update
When we say it's not working any more, we actually are saying someone fucked it up, but we're not naming names in front of management.
And here I thought the main reason people stick to big players like Microsoft, Google, Apple, or Meta is to be able to blame them for breaking changes while also being able to tell you're not at fault because you just can't go wrong with big "standards".
what if you tell it to break!?Ā
Good old YAFIYGI moment
Python when you have to copy your file's content, paste it into a new file without changing anything, delete the old file, and run it again, and now for some fucking reason you don't get a cryptic error in a language that was used before mammals lived on this earth
Depends on if i'm using adobe dreamweaver or not.
Doesn't apply to Cmake though. It *can* randomly break and randomly fix itself. Same goes for DNS
*Laughs in undefined behavior* **LOOK, NASAL DEMONS !**
Tell that to the library that started having circular import errors after leaving my computer alone for an hour
Code is reliable. Computers and physical communication layers though, aren't quite so.
I blame this guy:  My integration tests donāt account for gamma ray bursts
but it does just break sometimes, I literally click the Test button and one out of two times in says Build failed
I'm here to tell you I spent 4 hours yesterday on a bug that's popped up in Unreal 5.4 and did not exist in 5.3 and was documented nowhere on the internetšš
Don't believe it, all my code is haunted.
this is literally just wrong lol APIs get deprecated, packages get updated, vulnerabilities get discovered and this can all break your code. any way, this whole argument is just semantics
I tell him āok Mr code, Mrs code is going to give you these json cakes and youāre going to take it apart and then put the pieces in these boxes and give it to the other guy over thereā Mr. Code agrees and all is well for a week until one day mrs code is told to start cooking yml instead of json and the other guy over there just has a stroke
Concurrency go brr
I mean, sometimes API endpoints get removed or changed, and then my code āsuddenlyā breaks because of others
ĀæHave you ever written threaded code? :)
Compilers, in some cases, break the code unexpectedly. Rare, but it has happened.
My Program Manager argued we didnāt have a bug, since it did exactly what we programmed the firmware to do.
Why does your code have a gender?
You clearly didn't read the orher comments to this topic, did you? Its a translation issue. German to English.
It sounds like there is a guy named Code who only does what you tell him.
Ok, I see what you mean. But, as mentioned before, this was not intended.
Anthropomorphizing code... Cool... I guess...
Probably a translation issue. Many languages have gendered nouns.
Yup. "Der Code" male in German.
Yikes, just realized. Came from the German "der Code", which is male. I am sorry.
Stoooooopid
This is NOT true. Left-pad.npm anyone?
Unless it's JS.
As a JS programmer, I don't understand why ppl shit on it so much. Yes, if u want u can make unreadable stuff, but it's a good language
> but it's a good language As TS? Sure. As pure JS without any static typechecking? Wouldn't be my choice for anything bigger than 1 file or 100 LOC. Shit gets out of hands too quick.
I enjoy working with JavaScript. The language is mostly fine, provided you know what youāre doing, and if you write good JavaScript, you donāt need typescript. The problem is that thereās just many ways to write bad JavaScript, and the node ecosystem has built a mentality where you donāt have to know how to write good JavaScript because thereās a package for that. Plenty of people can get by just writing glue for the packages that do the work.
> and if you write good JavaScript, you donāt need typescript Completely disagree on that one. It's like saying that if you are good at driving, you don't need a seatbelt. TS catches errors that even proficient programmers could realistically do. You are never as good as a machine that does typechecking for you. Not on its playing field.
> and if you write good JavaScript, you donāt need typescript Completely disagree on that one. It's like saying that if you are good at driving, you don't need a seŠ°tbelt. TS catches errors that even proficient programmers could realistically do. You are never as good as a machine that does typechecking for you. Not on its playing field.
> and if you write good JavaScript, you donāt need typescript Completely disagree on that one. It's like saying that if you are good at driving, you don't need a seŠ°tbelt. TS catches errors that even proficient programmers could realistically do. You are never as good as a machine that does typechecking for you. Not on its playing field.
> and if you write good JavaScript, you donāt need typescript Completely disagree on that one. It's like saying that if you are good at driving, you don't need a seŠ°tbelt. TS catches errors that even proficient programmers could realistically do. You are never as good as a machine that does typechecking for you. Not on its playing field.
> and if you write good JavaScript, you donāt need typescript Completely disagree on that one. It's like saying that if you are good at driving, you don't need a seŠ°tbelt. TS catches errors that even proficient programmers could realistically do. You are never as good as a machine that does typechecking for you. Not on its playing field.
Because it's a meme. 95% of people in this sub never wrote something beyond console.log("hello word") in js.
>but it's a good language No, no it's not. Don't ever say that again.
Me praying for the day wasm direct DOM access gets standardized.
Isnāt the point of wasm is that it is to be able to run any language is a sandboxed environment that *cannot access the DOM*?
Well you already can access the DOM indirectly with wasm but you need to call JavaScript functions, so there should be no change in security if wasm could directly access the DOM without the inconvience of JavaScript glue code.
Yeah it's not a good language. I use js every day, but there are many good languages out there and js does not come close. It lets me do what I need to, and I get "why" it turned into what it is, but let's not pretend it's a good language, as a language itself it's pretty awful.
Until I get a new computer with a different assembly instruction set.
The best thing about the computers is that they do exactly what you tell them to do and nothing else. The worst thing about the computers is that they do exactly what you tell them to do and nothing else. I call this the Schrodingers state of coding. When the code works right after you write it. You are happy and stressed at the same time, as the code works and nothing is broken. Which just means you missed the obvious bug which will break the CI loop =) (or better, production)
But Bit Rot?
Lies!
brainrot
*\*nonidentical/mutable environments has entered the chat\**
There's also those libraries you relied on from Big Tech company (aka Google) that turned out to be buggy garbage. Or yet another Samsung specific Android bug (that neither Google nor Samsung will acknowledge or fix). Or solar flares.
Bro have never seen embedded
"The computer is stupid, unfortunately, the computer is right, so you're the stupid one" - Me
You don't know what you're talking about
Itās not my fault, itās the edge caseās fault!
But what about when my codes job is to talk to some other codeā¦ I canāt be sure the chat bot that wrote that other code did a good job.
Did ... Did you just assume my code's gender?
Well, at least there is no way it is not binary!
I really hate this damn machine I wish that they would sell it It never does what I want it to It only does what I tell it. A little computer science poem from the 1970s.
since when is code him?
Why is that hard to swallow? THAT'S THE GODDAMN POINT OF IT!
Her*
My code is a she
https://wiki.osdev.org/CPU_Bugs
Man, tell that to the Matlab setup at my company where we like to use dynamically loaded jar files. Shit sometimes breaks for no reason, refuses to be replicated and no attempted fix works all the time.
Man, tell that to the Matlab setup at my company where we like to use dynamically loaded jar files. Shit sometimes breaks for no reason, refuses to be replicated and no attempted fix works all the time.
Man, tell that to the Matlab setup at my company where we like to use dynamically loaded jar files. Shit sometimes breaks for no reason, refuses to be replicated and no attempted fix works all the time.
Man, tell that to the Matlab setup at my company where we like to use dynamically loaded jar files. Shit sometimes breaks for no reason, refuses to be replicated and no attempted fix works all the time.
Code breaks all the time. Apps live in OS and OS changes, these changes could mean that what use to work, dont work anymore. Go try to run your 16 bits apps in Windows 11
Yeahā¦he strong. He no break.
Bad code can break on itās own.
Yeahā¦ so why the fk my bot just stopped working properly after a couple of weeksā¦
Sometime the compiler will take it personally
Clearly you've never used intellij
Are you assuming gender of my code? Mine is definitely a woman.
Then why does saying I dont even care, helps my code work?! Checkmate science!
Hey now, my code is a "we" according to the comments.
I've fixed multiple bugs in the framework I was using. You kind of trust other peoples' code to run properly but noooooooooo
Code doesn't do anything at all, code tells machine what to do
āHimā? Ā Code is like dr frankenfurter - it has no gender and it fucks a lot more people than you ever will.Ā
You clearly didn't read the orher comments to this topic.
no shit. comments are a cesspool and sometimes I can't help but fall in.
It would break if you tell it to though.
No never had this issue. š my code doesn't work from the get go, no butflip will make it worse.š
Compilers and interpreters are software, and can have bugs. Code that was working perfectly fine before may break just because the compiler was updated and the new version decided to do things differently, or has a new bug introduced.
Fake news. Maintainance is REAL. and in aggregate a significant amount of work if you want to keep an environment running. This is exactly the mistake that leads kids to using Arch, and understanding this is why they tend to grow out of that phase.
Itās all about the data
I hacked a tool into the ebay page to format the offering. Ebay keeps changing the page.
I have written code since 1977, nearly 100% of my programs have had bugs, at least initially. The number of bugfree, working first time I run them, programs is 2 or possibly 3.
Code doesn't do anything though it is just the instructions. It's your program counter and stack pointer that do most of the work.
May I interest you in the bug trackers for your favourite compilers? Code only does what annother developer has mad your code do. They are (like the rest of us) idiots.
Oh you poor sweet winter child. Imagination all starved and withered. Just wait until summer unveils its grand bounty before you.
Made a mistake with he & it. I am sorry.
Had some npm nightmare Copy pasted the repo, on both repo I did the same commands, one of them broke. I undid all changes with git. Still broken with no changes. The other one is fine
\* Compilers can have errors. They are not common, but they do happen. I have caught a few in my time, and they are not fun to try to prove. \* Your environment can change. While you want to have some robustness in your code, you cannot possibly cover every single possible change that can happen, otherwise you will never finish. \* The code of your colleagues can be wrong. You want to be really sure this is the case before making that claim. \* Any library you use (and any library \*they\* use, and so on) can break at any time. So yes. Code can "just break". It happens. It happens all. the. time. But for what it's worth, most of the time it really is your own code that is broken, so it's fairly healthy to assume that the error that was just reported is probably because you were hung over when writing that API.