IRC Logs

Network: freenode Channel: #csharp

	Enter your search terms Submit search form
	Web www.irclog.org

[18:26]<mjzymygo>WTF?!?!?!
[18:27]<rrjufmyffrys>thats absolutely disgraceful
[18:27]<lyfuym-wjzc>WTF?!
[18:27]<mjzymygo>ever heard of peer review... or sacking gits responsible?
[18:27]<zyccus>oh I got more than one in there... the first one ends at line 1533
[18:27]<zyccus>as I said, it's a short one - there are some over 4000 lines
[18:28]<gjrvcxnne>so, traditionally, i'll use a table pointing to functions instead of a switch for switch's that'd have over 5-6 cases.... that'd be faster right?
[18:28]<gjrvcxnne>(actually, i usually only do it if there are more than 10)
[18:28]<gjrvcxnne>well, i won't ALWAYS do it lol
[18:28]<zyccus>peer review? Give vague 'spec' to bunch of Indians, who say 'yes yes yes we'll make it, only 10p!' and get it back 6 months later in an unbuildable state, not working at all, and spend the next 3 years hiring more indians to fix it - and it just gets worse
[18:29]<gjrvcxnne>a table of delegates would perform better than a long switch, right?
[18:29]<zyccus>GoatCheez: performance isn't the issue here
[18:29]<gjrvcxnne>just the horrible mess of code?
[18:29]<lyfuym-wjzc>rikkus WTF?
[18:30]<lyfuym-wjzc>eish
[18:30]<gjrvcxnne>that's another reason i like the table... the code comes out MUCH cleaner
[18:30]<zyccus>I think there should be a great big stick which you can hit junior developers with, which says "Get performance out of your head" on it
[18:30]<dzmzaivnz>The issue here is that xing out everything but 'case' didn't significantly impact the readability/sanity of the code? :)
[18:30]<gjrvcxnne>lol
[18:30]<zyccus>DRMacIver: it probably works better
[18:31]<dzmzaivnz>I can well believe it.
[18:31]<dzmzaivnz>I have to admit to being kindof curious. What does this actually do?
[18:31]<dzmzaivnz>If you're allowed to say.
[18:32]<zyccus>helps people comply with govt. regulations
[18:32]<zyccus>better not say much more than that - IRC gets logged these days ;)
[18:32]<dzmzaivnz>I guess I meant this specific piece of code rather than the program. :)
[18:32]<dzmzaivnz>Is it at least some relatively complex piece of functionality being implemented?
[18:32]<gjrvcxnne>uhyhhh a LOT of those case statements have code that looks VERY similary
[18:32]<gjrvcxnne>err similar
[18:32]<gjrvcxnne>is that ANOTHER wtf?
[18:32]<dzmzaivnz>Or have they just taken some simple problem and made it spiral out of all proportion.
[18:33]<zyccus>it is called by various bits of GUI when they want bits of themselves to be populated with data. It then calls back into the 'form's data grids to populate them. It's all very broken in terms of responsibilities
[18:33]<dzmzaivnz>ok
[18:33]<zyccus>GoatCheez: yes, the code is very similar, and yes, that's another wtf
[18:33]<zyccus>I call it CoC
[18:34]<gjrvcxnne>looks like 1/2 the case's code can be replace with a single funciton call
[18:34]<zyccus>There's IoC - Inversion of Control - and there's CoC - Confusion of Control
[18:34]<dzmzaivnz>Ha
[18:34]<zyccus>shame I couldn't think of a K-word
[18:35]<zyccus>thankfully, we just hired a Russian, who seems to be decent so far... today I noticed he removed a load of magic numbers from a source file he was editing and replaced them with constants
[18:36]<gjrvcxnne>ahhh, excellent
[18:44]<mjzymygo>I feel I have to add to the WTF...
[18:44]<mjzymygo>http://pastebin.ca/90301
[18:44]<mjzymygo>enjoy...
[18:44]<wjzc_dnvzfnzf>I'm a little confused on Ex 13-1 in "Learning C# 2005". It says: "define an interface IConvertible that indicates that a class can convert a strong to C# or VC2005. The interface should have 2 methods: ConvertToCSharp and ConvertToVB2005. ... do they literally mean that whatever string is passed in is forced to be "C#" or "VB2005" ?
[18:45]<mjzymygo>(they only let me paste this ecause it expires...)
[18:45]<mjzymygo>it's but one class.
[18:45]<mjzymygo>Apparently it's a 'DAL'...
[18:45]<lyfuym-wjzc>Moridin8 but thats code you wrote
[18:46]<lyfuym-wjzc>I can decode XXX
[18:46]<lyfuym-wjzc>:P
[18:46]<lyfuym-wjzc>I see the code
[18:46]<lyfuym-wjzc>its in my head
[18:46]<wjzc_dnvzfnzf>asking on a new chan since no answer here
[18:47]<zyccus>Moridin8: + "', xxxxxxx = '" + x.xxxxxxx.xxxxxxx("'","''")
[18:47]<zyccus>:)
[18:47]<lyfuym-wjzc>heheh
[18:47]<mjzymygo>rikkus: TOTALLY
[18:47]<mjzymygo>it's just horrible
[18:47]<lyfuym-wjzc>rikkus you wanto inject everything
[18:47]<lyfuym-wjzc>Matt are you ignoring me?
[18:47]<mjzymygo>it's the worst piece of shite I have ever played with
[18:47]<sxdrrdvd>Hey guys, I'm curious if properties in a singleton pattern are threadsafe. I'm thinking I can use this singleton pattern to access sessions
[18:47]<mjzymygo>Liquid-Work: nope
[18:48]<zyccus>Moridin8: does it have tests?
[18:48]<mjzymygo>rikkus: thats a bit like asking "does it have herpes"
[18:48]<lyfuym-wjzc>I presume it did
[18:48]<mjzymygo>I asked the development team (of 6 developers) if they new what SQL Injection was
[18:48]<mjzymygo>I am not even gonna say what the asnwers were.
[18:48]<lyfuym-wjzc>my DAL + ORM is about 15 classes
[18:48]<rwyfcygs>Did they involve penises?
[18:49]<lyfuym-wjzc>21 actually
[18:49]<lyfuym-wjzc>but more will come
[18:49]<lyfuym-wjzc>as I add more stuffs
[18:49]<lyfuym-wjzc>my oracle handler is almost done
[18:49]<mjzymygo>awilkins: no... but thats what I was thinking in an abstracted way about one or two of the developers...
[18:49]<mjzymygo>It's a god/blob object of the most obscure kind...
[18:50]<rwyfcygs>If I had my old work backups to hand, I'd post some of my old companys VB3 code
[18:50]<rwyfcygs>ButI'm in the office and not at home today
[18:50]<vxnsxrmjw>Does anyone here use SharpDevelop?
[18:50]<rwyfcygs>theshadow: Have used it but not very much in anger
[18:51]<mjzymygo>rikkusL that "..[16:45:19] <rikkus> Moridin8: + "', xxxxxxx = '" + x.xxxxxxx.xxxxxxx("'","''")..." line was their "solution" to the SQL injection.
[18:51]<vxnsxrmjw>Ok to clarify does anyone know how to get SharpDevelop to play nice with the 2.0 Framework?
[18:51]<lyfuym-wjzc>theshadow I have
[18:51]<lyfuym-wjzc>on .net 1.1
[18:51]<lyfuym-wjzc>not 2.0
[18:51]<zyccus>Moridin8: I recognise it... seen it a few times now
[18:51]<lyfuym-wjzc>sorry mate
[18:51]<rwyfcygs>theshadow: Install the new .NEt 2.0 version?
[18:51]<vxnsxrmjw>awilkins: been done
[18:51]<lyfuym-wjzc>install .net 2.0?
[18:51]<rwyfcygs>Define "not playing nice"
[18:52]<lyfuym-wjzc>:P
[18:52]<vxnsxrmjw>Liquid-Work: done
[18:52]<vxnsxrmjw>awilkins: *smack*
[18:52]<mjzymygo>Everything aboveline 2435 is my code... to fix some glaring security holes. but I wasn't allowed to create anything outside of that object... and Stored Procedures???? *LMAO* DBA's told me to get stuffed
[18:53]<mjzymygo>of course... "my code" is now a loose term considering it's been revisited by the numbskulls a few times
[18:53]<lyfuym-wjzc>erm
[18:53]<lyfuym-wjzc>some of my comments in code

Back to #csharp
Or go to some related logs:
#gentoo
#gentoo
#netbsd
#reactos
#gentoo