F*CK!



  • I'm not that experienced with Javascript and IE, so I'm not really sure where the WTF is and whose fault the problem is that caused the coder's unhappiness, but still I found this funny.

    Because I'm new here, and I haven't picked up this forum's unwritten rules yet, I thought it best to add those asterisks just in case. They weren't there in the original.
     

    function modalwindow_show() {
    if (window.ActiveXObject) {
    /* F*CKING internet explorer F*CKING lets the F*CKING lists shine through the
    F*CKING window. F*CK! Now I have to go and F*CKING hide them because that
    F*CKING piece of Microsoft SH*T can't even F*CKING figure out that if I open a
    F*CKING css layer then it should hide what F*CKING is below it. F*CK. This
    F*CKING piece of crap is too brain-dead to F*CKING understand z-indexes. */

    objs = document.getElementsByTagName("select");
    for (i=0; i<objs.length; i++) objs[i].style.display = "none"; //F*CK!
    }

    document.getElementById("modalLayer").style.display = "block";
    }

    function modalwindow_hide() {
    if (window.ActiveXObject) {
    /* And because F*CKING internet explorer made me hide the drop-down lists,
    now I've to F*CKING make them reappear. I suppose I should be *thankful*
    that it sup-F*CKING-ports style.display */
    objs = document.getElementsByTagName("select");
    for (i=0; i<objs.length; i++) objs[i].style.display = "block";
    }
    document.getElementById("modalLayer").style.display = "none";
    }


  • @mariuns said:


          /* FCKING internet explorer FCKING lets the FCKING lists shine through the
    F
    CKING window. FCK! Now I have to go and FCKING hide them because that
    FCKING piece of Microsoft SHT can't even FCKING figure out that if I open a
    F
    CKING css layer then it should hide what FCKING is below it. FCK. This
    FCKING piece of crap is too brain-dead to FCKING understand z-indexes.
          / And because FCKING internet explorer made me hide the drop-down lists,
    now I've to F
    CKING make them reappear. I suppose I should be thankful
    that it sup-F*CKING-ports style.display /

    I'm mostly impressed that he got all of the FCKINGs to line up on top of each other (well, almost).  Way to go.



  • @belgariontheking said:

    @mariuns said:

          /* FCKING internet explorer FCKING lets the FCKING lists shine through the
    F
    CKING window. FCK! Now I have to go and FCKING hide them because that
    FCKING piece of Microsoft SHT can't even FCKING figure out that if I open a
    F
    CKING css layer then it should hide what FCKING is below it. FCK. This
    FCKING piece of crap is too brain-dead to FCKING understand z-indexes.
          / And because FCKING internet explorer made me hide the drop-down lists,
    now I've to F
    CKING make them reappear. I suppose I should be thankful
    that it sup-F*CKING-ports style.display /

    I'm mostly impressed that he got all of the FCKINGs to line up on top of each other (well, almost).  Way to go.

    Obligatory xkcd.  



  • Haha, I think I've had to work around that IE bug before. Based on the comments, I'm guessing that the guy was called at home to come fix a stupid issue for a customer he doesn't like.



  • Having been briefly exposed to IE, I know that fucking feeling.



  • A FCKING simple google search would FCKING reveal this is a common IE FCKING problem. The select FCKING object is handled FCKING as a win-FCKING-dow and is FCKING therefore FCKING rendered FCKING above FCKING everything FCKING else FCKING F*CKING.

    'scuse my french.



  • It's a good thing that you put 's everywhere, otherwise I would have know the word that is represented by FCK.  If I had recognized it, I would go insane with rage and vomit from the agony of reading a swear word.  Imagine if someone with less tolerance than I might have read that?  They most certainly would go on a killing spree and rob banks.  THAT is what swear words do to people.  But now that you put that * in the middle of the word, I have no idea what it is. Nobody does.  Thank you, you generous person, for shielding the world from the horror that is F*CK.



  • You know, back in the days when CompuServe was still an important part of the IT world, I used to be a member and I used to participate in their forums and discussions. There particularly was a forum from a software manufacturer I was in intensive contact with. My employer used to be an important customer and I used to be the technical contact. I once dared to use one of these oh-so-disgusting swear words to express the emotion I was experiencing with a problem their software used to have. And - bang - I got kicked and banned from the forum. After I apologized deeply to the moderator and explained that english was not my first language and that, therefore, it might be possible that I wasn't always in a position to judge offensiveness of language, I got reinstated. I can't remember who that software manufacturer was. It's probably for the better...



  • @yet another Matt said:

    A FCKING simple google search would FCKING reveal this is a common IE FCKING problem. The select FCKING object is handled FCKING as a win-FCKING-dow and is FCKING therefore FCKING rendered FCKING above FCKING everything FCKING else FCKING F*CKING.

    'scuse my french.

    I'm pretty sure that's Saxon, not Franckish.

     Anyhow, yeah, it's an IE6 bug caused by select lists getting their own windows.  IE7 has fixed that.  See?  IE7 fixed something!



  • @belgariontheking said:

    @mariuns said:

          /* FCKING internet explorer FCKING lets the FCKING lists shine through the
    F
    CKING window. FCK! Now I have to go and FCKING hide them because that
    FCKING piece of Microsoft SHT can't even FCKING figure out that if I open a
    F
    CKING css layer then it should hide what FCKING is below it. FCK. This
    FCKING piece of crap is too brain-dead to FCKING understand z-indexes.
          / And because FCKING internet explorer made me hide the drop-down lists,
    now I've to F
    CKING make them reappear. I suppose I should be thankful
    that it sup-FCKING-ports style.display /

    I'm mostly impressed that he got all of the FCKINGs to line up on top of each other (well, almost).  Way to go.

     

    Wurd! IE has some other funkiness, its made so that you use ie-specific sht that way your program works (had ie implemented standards then it would have worked anyways) and your program is now ie specific. woo! 



  • @Stupidumb said:

    It's a good thing that you put 's everywhere, otherwise I would have know the word that is represented by FCK.  If I had recognized it, I would go insane with rage and vomit from the agony of reading a swear word.  Imagine if someone with less tolerance than I might have read that?  They most certainly would go on a killing spree and rob banks.  THAT is what swear words do to people.  But now that you put that * in the middle of the word, I have no idea what it is. Nobody does.  Thank you, you generous person, for shielding the world from the horror that is F*CK.

    Yeah, people.  Grow some balls, for fuck's sake.  You aren't fooling anyone with those asterisks.
     



  • @dlikhten said:

    @belgariontheking said:
    @mariuns said:

          /* FCKING internet explorer FCKING lets the FCKING lists shine through the
    F
    CKING window. FCK! Now I have to go and FCKING hide them because that
    FCKING piece of Microsoft SHT can't even FCKING figure out that if I open a
    F
    CKING css layer then it should hide what FCKING is below it. FCK. This
    FCKING piece of crap is too brain-dead to FCKING understand z-indexes.
          / And because FCKING internet explorer made me hide the drop-down lists,
    now I've to F
    CKING make them reappear. I suppose I should be thankful
    that it sup-FCKING-ports style.display /

    I'm mostly impressed that he got all of the FCKINGs to line up on top of each other (well, almost).  Way to go.

     

    Wurd! IE has some other funkiness, its made so that you use ie-specific sht that way your program works (had ie implemented standards then it would have worked anyways) and your program is now ie specific. woo! 

    Was this meant to be retardedly vague? Or was that a serious comment?



  • Would parental control block this script if he would not use these stars ? I do not have such software could someone try that for me ???



  • @shadowman said:

    Yeah, people.  Grow some balls, for fuck's sake.  You aren't fooling anyone with those asterisks.



    Yeah, I've never understood why people think fck is less offensive than fuck. On the contrary, I've seen people use fck or f u c k to
    get around language filters in online games. This really annoys me, the games provide a way to disable the language filters if you
    need to see the naughty words, there's no reason to force other people to read them if they want to leave their filters on.



  • @shadowman said:

    @Stupidumb said:

    It's a good thing that you put 's everywhere, otherwise I would have know the word that is represented by FCK.  If I had recognized it, I would go insane with rage and vomit from the agony of reading a swear word.  Imagine if someone with less tolerance than I might have read that?  They most certainly would go on a killing spree and rob banks.  THAT is what swear words do to people.  But now that you put that * in the middle of the word, I have no idea what it is. Nobody does.  Thank you, you generous person, for shielding the world from the horror that is FCK.

    Yeah, people.  Grow some balls, for fuck's sake.  You aren't fooling anyone with those asterisks.
     

     * ****?
     



  • @dlikhten said:

    @belgariontheking said:
    @mariuns said:

          /* FCKING internet explorer FCKING lets the FCKING lists shine through the
    F
    CKING window. FCK! Now I have to go and FCKING hide them because that
    FCKING piece of Microsoft SHT can't even FCKING figure out that if I open a
    F
    CKING css layer then it should hide what FCKING is below it. FCK. This
    FCKING piece of crap is too brain-dead to FCKING understand z-indexes.
          / And because FCKING internet explorer made me hide the drop-down lists,
    now I've to F
    CKING make them reappear. I suppose I should be thankful
    that it sup-FCKING-ports style.display /

    I'm mostly impressed that he got all of the FCKINGs to line up on top of each other (well, almost).  Way to go.

     

    Wurd! IE has some other funkiness, its made so that you use ie-specific sht that way your program works (had ie implemented standards then it would have worked anyways) and your program is now ie specific. woo! 

    I'm going to assume that when the developers responsible for implementing CSS in IE found out that form elements where there own special little universe, that they uttered a word starting with F*..

    As a webdeveloper i can't really be bothered by it though. It's reasonably easy to fix/workaround with a bit of js, and it doesn't really happen a lot. There are far more annoying things in IE6 then this.
    And besides most of the time when you have to start messing with z-indexes you should probably re-think your page flow/layout anyway*.

    My personal top IE6 annoyances would be the lack of alpha png handling, IE doesn't like JS variables named after HTML id's  and lack of min-/max- height/width css attributes.
    There are  of course a lot more problems/annoyances, but these are the ones i encounter the most, so they annoy me the most.

     

    * It is my personal opinion that excessive use of z-index makes the html/css harder to interpret because the flow of HTML is not longer representing the buildup of the page. I pretty much feel the same way about position: absolute;. Its not a law or something, but i just try to avoid it.
     



  • I've had my own experiences with IE. Floated divs STILL don't work quite right like they do in the other browsers I tested with (Firefox, Opera and Safari). So I resorted to using a full-page table:

    <table id="ie_sux">

    It got picked up by the client. Wups! I changed it to ie_bwa (=bug work around) but now the other people in the office refer to this kind of thing as a "ie_sux moment". But I would never put actual swear words anywhere a client might possibly see (and that includes server-side source even if we are hosting it for them).



  • Oh I so feel the pain of the original author of that code. I'm so done with working with IE that I nowadays just resort to quick hacks.

    I just add a separate CSS file for IE and position:relative every element that disrespects the standards.
    I also intentionally add ugly Javascript hacks to work around what remains from css position:relative abuse.
    If something can't be hacked to look decent I just degrade the site from where I can. Tough luck.

    This usually doesn't take more than a couple hours depending on the complexity of the layout. Those who use IE still get a decent experience minus some bells and whistles.

    Fortunately IE has the conditional comments element so that I don't pollute this BS on the rest of the other browsers out there. I really just don't care anymore to work elegantly around the 'features' of IE.



  • I just use application/xhtml+xml. Solved all my IE woes.



  • I've found it interesting that now IE6 (not 7) has begun to behave like a little child with odd css bugs and layout wonks -- it usedn't to do that.

    PS.

    Global note: ULEARN the term "css layer". There are elements, blocks, boxes, and there's CSS. It's not a Photoshop file.

    And it's true that the IE's have severe issues with z-index. But part of that is the poorly defined standards for hierarchie for stacking: element sequence, float, positioning, z-index. Sometimes the stuff just doesn't work -- and some of it is even dependent on the nesting. I've fixed a stacking bug where the overlay was suddenly placed correctly when I put the element one level higher in the tree, even thouhg the element it was suppose to go on top of was not even in the same branch.

    But eh. I've resolved myself to fixing lastly for IE6, and making it work primarily in FFX and IE7, and sometimes do a quick check for Opera and Safari, which usually turn out right anyway.
     



  • @dhromed said:

    FFX

    I didn't know Final Fantasy X included a web browser ;-P



  • @dhromed said:

    I've found it interesting that now IE6 (not 7) has begun to behave like a little child with odd css bugs and layout wonks -- it usedn't to do that.

    But eh. I've resolved myself to fixing lastly for IE6, and making it work primarily in FFX and IE7, and sometimes do a quick check for Opera and Safari, which usually turn out right anyway.

    I know I'm probably the only one in the world with this opinion, but I can't help but wonder what kind of weird shit you people are trying to pull off when you complain about IE6. I don't develop websites professionally, but I do work with HTML and CSS as a hobby. I've always had more trouble porting my designs to Firefox and Opera than with IE6 (or Netscape and Mozilla back in the day). Firefox 1 and Opera 7 had bugs with iframes with respect to event propagation (onMouseOut events fired before the mouse left the entity as well as some other things), and Opera had a terrible iframe z-indexing bug (just plain couldn't z-index an iframe). Why am I the only one?



  • @Zemm said:

    <table id="ie_sux">

    agreed

    I remember one of my side jobs once.  I was taking html code from the web designer and working it into my php (yes) code.  I would work it in, test it in real browsers (safari and firefox), then send it off to my boss, who would open it in a fake browser (ie).  Most of the time, the page would extend forever (like 20 screens worth) in ie, but would look perfect in real browsers.  In this case, TRWTF is table-driven design.  Something about multiple tables having 'height="99%"' stacked on top of each other.  I swear, I could have coded everything for IE only, intentionally made it break in every other browser, and have been fine.  I wouldn't do that to real browser users, though.  I would do that to ie users.

    side note:  in firefox, when I'm typing in a textarea, firefox gets the red squiggly underline, but Firefox does not.  Same for mozilla/Mozilla.  What a clever way to enforce your branding. 



  • Firefox also does the same thing for Microsoft, Linux, Unix and quite possibly a host of others. How is that specifically enforcing one's branding again?



  • @Lingerance said:

    Firefox also does the same thing for Microsoft, Linux, Unix and quite possibly a host of others. How is that specifically enforcing one's branding again?

    hmm, didn't test with any others... Also, I didn't say it didn't do it with others. 

    But isn't UNIX supposed to be all capitalized?   



  • The Real WTF is that he hides all dropdowns and multi-selects. All you need to do is slip an iframe under the div, which will hide only those elements affected by the 'modal' dialog.



  • @SuperousOxide said:

    Yeah, I've never understood why people think f*ck is less offensive than fuck.

    In fact, I think adding asterisks makes the "censured" words stand out much better from the rest of the text.

    Anyway, I personally never swear. I may use "softer curse words" (crap! dang!) or "alternative curse words" (crèpe! sheeze! fork!) sometimes, but I do it ironically/sarcastically most of the time. Some other times it's because I don't want to offend different-minded people, or just out of pure habit.



  • @Zecc said:

    Anyway, I personally never swear. I may use "softer curse words" (crap! dang!) or "alternative curse words" (crèpe! sheeze! fork!) sometimes, but I do it ironically/sarcastically most of the time. Some other times it's because I don't want to offend different-minded people, or just out of pure habit.

    People who come from front line with a "child-friendly" environment will generally avoid swearing, sometimes they come up with interesting ways around it, some swear in foreign languages, some will swear in obscure languages, others use Latin, some use gibberish, but there are the ones you stay away from, the ones who make up their own languages for the sole purpose of swearing in them. Personally I use gibberish.



  • Definitely NSFW

    NSFW.

    <font size="-1">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Eiv0MOLSd_Q</font>

    http://www.youtube.com/profile_videos?user=jonlajoie if the first link doesn't work right. 

    I'm behind a company firewall, so I'm not 100% on either link working right. 

    I repeat, NSFW 



  • @Lingerance said:

    @Zecc said:
    Anyway, I personally never swear. I may use "softer curse words" (crap! dang!) or "alternative curse words" (crèpe! sheeze! fork!) sometimes, but I do it ironically/sarcastically most of the time. Some other times it's because I don't want to offend different-minded people, or just out of pure habit.

    People who come from front line with a "child-friendly" environment will generally avoid swearing, sometimes they come up with interesting ways around it, some swear in foreign languages, some will swear in obscure languages, others use Latin, some use gibberish, but there are the ones you stay away from, the ones who make up their own languages for the sole purpose of swearing in them. Personally I use gibberish.

     

    So you're telling me that whole sentence was a swear word? 



  • @Zecc said:

    @SuperousOxide said:

    Yeah, I've never understood why people think f*ck is less offensive than fuck.

    In fact, I think adding asterisks makes the "censured" words stand out much better from the rest of the text.

    Which leads us neatly to the preferred arrangement: fuck


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    Mildly related article on Reg Developer this morning: Why Borland trashed its spreadsheet



  • @Lingerance said:

    People who come from front line with a "child-friendly" environment will generally avoid swearing, sometimes they come up with interesting ways around it, some swear in foreign languages, some will swear in obscure languages, others use Latin, some use gibberish

    (Hm. Isn't "fuck" from French? Meaning "to stab", or some such. It should be okay then.)



  • @magetoo said:

    (Hm. Isn't "fuck" from French? Meaning "to stab", or some such. It should be okay then.)

    Google translate, Babelfish and I disagree.


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @Lingerance said:

    @magetoo said:
    (Hm. Isn't "fuck" from French? Meaning "to stab", or some such. It should be okay then.)

    Google translate, Babelfish and I disagree.
    Snopes also disagrees. It doesn't even mention the French.



  • What's funny is that he's written it in JavaScript comments which are exposed to the outside world via ViewSource. He should have used server side comments to hide them like so...

    function modalwindow_show() {
    if (window.ActiveXObject) {
    <% // F*CKING internet explorer F*CKING lets the F*CKING lists shine through the
    F*CKING window. F*CK! Now I have to go and F*CKING hide them because that
    F*CKING piece of Microsoft SH*T can't even F*CKING figure out that if I open a
    F*CKING css layer then it should hide what F*CKING is below it. F*CK. This
    F*CKING piece of crap is too brain-dead to F*CKING understand z-indexes. %>

    objs = document.getElementsByTagName("select");
    for (i=0; i<objs.length; i++) objs[i].style.display = "none"; //F*CK!
    }

    document.getElementById("modalLayer").style.display = "block";
    }

  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @Sunday Ironfoot said:

    What's funny is that he's written it in JavaScript comments which are exposed to the outside world via ViewSource. He should have used server side comments to hide them like so...

    Did it not occur to you that it was possibly done the way it was deliberately?



  • @PJH said:

    @Sunday Ironfoot said:

    What's funny is that he's written it in JavaScript comments which are exposed to the outside world via ViewSource. He should have used server side comments to hide them like so...

    Did it not occur to you that it was possibly done the way it was deliberately?

    Shouldn't it be <font face="courier new,courier"><%-- --%></font> rather than <font face="courier new,courier"><% // multiple lines in a one line comment %></font> ?

    Anyway, why are we assuming it's server-side scripting anyway? It could be a static page.

    Update: in fact, this sounds like code than would be stored in a .js file, so it most probably is in a static "page". 


Log in to reply
 

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