One liners that make you giggle



  •       Iterator tit = transactions.iterator();
     



  • parent.parent.parent.parent.parent.parent.parent.parent.parent.parent.
    parent.parent.parent.parent.parent.parent.parent.window.document.
    getElementByID("hiddenCounter").value++;



  • Command-line one-liners:

    man man

    after aliasing the 'man' command to 'girl':
    man girl

    if only there was a way to arrange this one...:
    girl girl



  • if ((this.Something)&&(this._SomethingElse != null)&&(this._SomethingElse.Id != 0)&&(!this._SomethingElse.SomethingIsGoingOn)&&(!this._SomethingElse.SomethingHappened)&&(this._SomethingElse.HasStuff))

    It's anonymized, but I swear to god that's in our framework. Yes, every single this-dot is unnecessary. I've found up to eight this-dots on one line.



  • @djork said:

    if ((this.Something)&&(this._SomethingElse != null)&&(this._SomethingElse.Id != 0)&&(!this._SomethingElse.SomethingIsGoingOn)&&(!this._SomethingElse.SomethingHappened)&&(this._SomethingElse.HasStuff))

    It's anonymized, but I swear to god that's in our framework. Yes, every single this-dot is unnecessary. I've found up to eight this-dots on one line.

    I get why some folks use "this." where it's not necessary; sometimes it's to clarify things in a file with a lot of MyClass.staticConstant's (I know it's not necessary, but sometimes, especially with deeply inherited classes, it makes things more obvious).

    Two of my personal pet peeves:

    class MyClass { protected int MY_CONSTANT = 1; }

    if (MyClass.this.MY_CONSTANT==x) { ...}

     and

    [code]class A { protected int x=1;}
    class B extends A { protected int x=2; }
    class C extends B { protected int x=3; }[/code].

    which forces hard-coding stupidity like:

    [code]void xxx() {
    C c = new C();
    System.out.println("c.x="+c.x);
    System.out.println("b.x="+((B)c).x);
    System.out.println("a.x="+((A)c).x);
    }[/code]



  • #define barf cout
    #define gorge cin
     



  • @djork said:

    after aliasing the 'man' command to 'girl':

    man girl

    You've been to thailand recently, haven't you.



  • Can't find the offending code right now, but saw this once:

    if(bUserInitialized){
         // cout << "User is initialized";
    }

    else{
        // cout << "User is not initialized";
    }

     



  • @djork said:

    after aliasing the 'man' command to 'girl':


    man girl

    Surely you mean "girl man"?

    Also, I suspect (but don't know for sure) that you could either rename or symlink the appropriate file (looks to be /usr/share/man/man1/man.1.gz on a RHEL box) to girl to make "girl girl" (or "man girl") work. Fnar.
     



  • Perl's scoping can make some interesting lines like:

     

    my $line; #whose line is it, anyway?

    our $house; #in the middle of the street

     

    For no particular technical reason, object self-references use the variable $self, rather than the keyword 'this'.  Unlike 'this', however, '$self' is not set in stone, and I think it is done just so that each method begins with:

    my $self = shift();

     

    Then there is the infamous Perl threat clause:

    $object->method() or die();

     

    There is a module that implements an enhanced exception handling ability.... its key method is called "die_trying()" and is used syntactically the same way, e.g.:

    $object->method() or die_trying();

     

    I have been known to define some error text in a variable $HORRIBLY, so as to be able to write:

    $object->method() or die($HORRIBLY); 

     

    On another note, I think it would be funny to create a Makefile that has a "love" and "war" target defined (maybe just alias them to "all") so that you can:

    $ make love

    $ make war

     


    Along that same line, you could also define appropriate targets to:

    $ make ammends

    $ make peace

    $ make over

    $ make up

    $ make the_rounds

    $ make friends

    $ make money

    ...etc.

     



  • @Critter said:

    $ make love

     My favorite was
    $ make install --not war
     

    (ok, whenever I saw that I assumed that '--not' would exclude a particular target, but it's not in the man pages.  Am I reading something wrong, or did the guy I borrowed that from lie?)



  • I have also seen one on Slashdot in a sig file that went something like:

        unzip strip grep finger fsck more yes

    there may be more to it, that's about all I can remember of it.


     



  • @vt_mruhlin said:

    (ok, whenever I saw that I assumed that '--not' would exclude a particular target, but it's not in the man pages.  Am I reading something wrong, or did the guy I borrowed that from lie?)

    Looks to me like there are no double-dash options for GNU make, but make is not 100% standardised, by a log shot.  I would have expected maybe:

     
        make install #not war

    ...or something like that.

     



  • @Cloaked User said:

    @djork said:

    man girl

    Surely you mean "girl man"?

     

    Depends. Girl comes first, would make you more popular with the ladies. Man comes first, is more realistic.



  • This was already mentioned in some other thread:

    [code]long fuck = 99;[/code]



  • how about --keep-going?



  • A favorite C library of mine that we had in an old project -- gstring :)



  • define("PC_LOAD_LETTER",99);

    Which I placed in there to generate "PC_LOAD_LETTER?  What the f**k is that???" from a co-worker when he went into that service. 



  • if ($framework->authentication->login($users->get_field("auth_typ"),$str_user_name, $str_password) == AUTH_RC_LOGIN_SUCCESS) {
    // Is great success. I like. High five.

    -- snip --

    return AUTH_KNOWN_USER;
    }

    I love the comment. Especially if you say it like Borat.



  • @djork said:

    Command-line one-liners:

    man man

    after aliasing the 'man' command to 'girl':
    man girl

    if only there was a way to arrange this one...:
    girl girl

    in ksh:

    alias girl='echo giggity;';

    $ girl girl

    giggity

    giggity



  • user@host:~$ touch beanbag_girls_tits
    touch: cannot touch `beanbag_girls_tits': Permission denied 



  • @djork said:

    if
    ((this.Something)&&(this._SomethingElse !=
    null)&&(this._SomethingElse.Id !=
    0)&&(!this._SomethingElse.SomethingIsGoingOn)&&(!this._SomethingElse.SomethingHappened)&&(this._SomethingElse.HasStuff))

    It's anonymized, but I swear to god that's in our framework. Yes, every single this-dot is unnecessary. I've found up to eight this-dots on one line.

    I'm not suprised to see stuff like this. After all, we have code completion.

    Not really funny but lines like if(something == true) {...} makes me giggle every now and then



  • DoMagic();

     

    #define ODD 1 



  • @Critter said:

     
    On another note, I think it would be funny to create a Makefile that has a "love" and "war" target defined (maybe just alias them to "all") so that you can:

    $ make love

    $ make war

     

    > make love

    make: *** No rule to make target `love'.  Stop.

     

    I think I just got dissed. 

     



  • @Critter : Seen that one too, it is : unzip;strip;touch;finger;mount;fsck;more;yes;unmount;sleep



  • @snoofle said:

    @djork said:

    if ((this.Something)&&(this._SomethingElse != null)&&(this._SomethingElse.Id != 0)&&(!this._SomethingElse.SomethingIsGoingOn)&&(!this._SomethingElse.SomethingHappened)&&(this._SomethingElse.HasStuff))

    It's anonymized, but I swear to god that's in our framework. Yes, every single this-dot is unnecessary. I've found up to eight this-dots on one line.

    I get why some folks use "this." where it's not necessary; sometimes it's to clarify things in a file with a lot of MyClass.staticConstant's (I know it's not necessary, but sometimes, especially with deeply inherited classes, it makes things more obvious).

    [/code]

    Believe me, it's not making anything clearer. It's simply that every instance variable is preceded with "this." because it brings up intellisense.



  • $> mysql <FONT face="Courier New">--i-am-a-dummy</FONT>



  • <cfparam name="MAXIMUM_FUCKUPS" default="10">

     ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Don't ask...Its a dev version of a coldfusion app. This actually was written by a colleague of mine & I. It would have been deployed to production like this. However, the Project Manager had us switch it to MAXIMUM_ERRORS.

    Although I don't remember why we used that name, but the Senior Programmers on the team passed it through the Reviewing process!



  • @Critter said:

    For no particular technical reason, object self-references use the variable $self, rather than the keyword 'this'.  Unlike 'this', however, '$self' is not set in stone, and I think it is done just so that each method begins with:

    my $self = shift();


    This is a convention, not a keyword. You could easily use $this instead. It just happens to be the first argument passed to the function when you call object->method().

    Sometimes, you will also have my $class = shift;  instead (in the constructor for a class, when you're calling ClassName->new(...)  or whatever you've called the constructor).

    Then there is the infamous Perl threat clause:

    $object->method() or die();

    Ever see any Perl poetry



  • When we were working on one of our software projects at Uni, we noticed that we were often mistyping:

     make run

     as:

    make urn

    So we added a task to the Makefile that echoed something like:

    _____
    \   /
    |   |
    |   |
    \   /
     \ /
    .:::.
    

     



  • @vt_mruhlin said:

    Can't find the offending code right now, but saw this once:

    if(bUserInitialized){
         // cout << "User is initialized";
    }

    else{
        // cout << "User is not initialized";
    }


    That's leftover debugging code, from the printf() school of debugging.




  • @djork said:

    Command-line one-liners:

    man man

    after aliasing the 'man' command to 'girl':
    man girl

    if only there was a way to arrange this one...:
    girl girl

    What about...

    man mount



  • Just after typing the following code line in perl I laughed, then added the comment - it was easier than renaming the variables everywhere else, besides it does make perfect sense...

    Just try explaining it, in words - without stumbling over the word array (or what you're referring to)

    [code]
    $arrays[$array{'array'}]=%array;
    # Probably better understood as:
    # $raid_arrays[$this_raid_array{'raid_array_id'}] = %this_raid_array
    # But that's no fun ;)
    [/code]



  • The total contents of a certain ASP classic file:

    <%
    // Response.write("<p class="text_content">Template under construction.</p>");
    %>
     



  • @fennec said:

    @Critter said:
    my $self = shift();

    This is a convention, not a keyword. You could easily use $this instead. It just happens to be the first argument passed to the function when you call object->method().

    Exactly.  Like I said, it is for no particular technical reason.
     

    @fennec said:

    Sometimes, you will also have my $class = shift;  instead (in the constructor for a class, when you're calling ClassName->new(...)  or whatever you've called the constructor).

    Right.  In that particular case, $self wouldn't be an appropriate name, because it is not referring to an instance. 

    @fennec said:


    Ever see any Perl poetry

    I had heard of it, but not really paid it much attention.  I followed your link, though, and I think I'm going to have to look at it a bit more later.  Thanks.
     



  • @Bob said:

    Just after typing the following code line in perl I laughed, then added the comment - it was easier than renaming the variables everywhere else, besides it does make perfect sense...

    Just try explaining it, in words - without stumbling over the word array (or what you're referring to)

    [code]
    $arrays[$array{'array'}]=%array;
    # Probably better understood as:
    # $raid_arrays[$this_raid_array{'raid_array_id'}] = %this_raid_array
    # But that's no fun ;)
    [/code]

    You are not expected to understand this


     



  • In C, when an infinite loop is legitimately needed:

     

    #define EVER ;;

    . . .

    for(EVER)

    {

    . . . .


     



  • @Goldie said:

    @Critter : Seen that one too, it is : unzip;strip;touch;finger;mount;fsck;more;yes;unmount;sleep

     

    I think we could work "head" and "tail" in somewhere



  • Love this thread... made me join just to post some of my faves:

    catch(RuleException rexTheKing)

     
    Also:

    catch(Exception fit){
    Logger.Log(fit)
    throw fit;
    }
    

    This is from a friend who hated the MS UIP and MVC in general:

    IAccountController extraCode = (IAccountController) this.Controller;
    That controller might later call back to a manager class:
    IAccountManager stupid = ManagerFactory.CreateAccountManager();

    Writing some XML Tranformation code late at night resulted in something like this:

    XmlTransformer optimusPrime = new XmlTransformer();
    XmlTransformer megatron = new XmlTransformer();


  • @badfrog said:

    catch(Exception fit){
    Logger.Log(fit)
    throw fit;
    }

    Just a note, while 'throw fit' is funny, you generally want to do this instead:

    catch(Exception fit){
    Logger.Log(fit)
    throw;
    }
    And, if you already know this, I'll shut up now.
    


  • in Java

    catch (SomeExceptionType bone) {

         // do some exception handling

         throw bone;

    }

     



  • @Carnildo said:

    @vt_mruhlin said:

    Can't find the offending code right now, but saw this once:

    if(bUserInitialized){
    // cout << "User is initialized";
    }

    else{
    // cout << "User is not initialized";
    }


    That's leftover debugging code, from the printf() school of debugging.


    Yeah, but look where the comments are...
    if(bool)
        //Do nothing
    else
        //Do nothing here either!

     



  • While you're at it, integrate it into your program.

    public class TemperTantrum : System.ApplicationException
    {
        public TemperTantrum() : base()
        {}

        public TemperTantrum(string message) : base(message)
        {}
    }

    throw new TemperTantrum("AAARGH!!");



  • Part of a method doc comment:

    [code] @return Boolean true or false[/code]

    But what about FILE_NOT_FOUND? 



  • @m0ffx said:

    user@host:~$ touch beanbag_girls_tits
    touch: cannot touch `beanbag_girls_tits': Permission denied 

     

    More like--

    [kirchhoff@img]$ grep -i nipple ~lickylindsay/tits

    grep: /home/lickylindsay/tits: Permission denied. 



  • From Programming Perl:

    $crystal->$meth();

     



  • There's a few good ones in [url=http://perlmonks.org/?node_id=129726]this thread[/url].  Some highlights:

    my $yea_verily_I_say_unto_thee_that_the_number_of_the_tr_tag_shall = $tr_start;

    skip $Why, 2 unless Pigs->can('fly');

    while (is_computer_on() && !is_computer_on_fire())



  • @badfrog said:

    Love this thread... made me join just to post some of my faves:

    catch(RuleException rexTheKing)

     
    This is from a friend who hated the MS UIP and MVC in general:

    IAccountController extraCode = (IAccountController) this.Controller;
    That controller might later call back to a manager class:
    IAccountManager stupid = ManagerFactory.CreateAccountManager();

    Writing some XML Tranformation code late at night resulted in something like this:

    XmlTransformer optimusPrime = new XmlTransformer();
    XmlTransformer megatron = new XmlTransformer();

    Bahaha 



  • Found last night in some old HTTP parsing code:

    [code]//TODO: Handle unhandled versions... what?[/code]



  • found this one yesterday while working on an interface

     float cum_log_lik_ratio;

     


Log in to reply
 

Looks like your connection to What the Daily WTF? was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.