To my dearly departed colleague



  • He left on Friday, I got stuck with making some updates to an existing system...here are a few code samples I came across today...

    1. He was a bit of a whizz with SQL...and no, there is no valid reason for this crap...

     private static String SELECT_TAG_MEASURE_STATEMENT =
      "select measure_id, name "
       + "from measure "
       + "where measure_id in "
       + "(select measure_id from tag_measure where tag_action_id in "
       + "(select tag_action_id from tag_action where action_id  = ?)) "
       + "order by name";
       
       
    2. ???????
       
        Calendar todaysDate = Calendar.getInstance();
        Date trialTime = new Date();
        todaysDate.setTime(trialTime);
       
    3. Is anyone else familiar with 'leftONLOAD'? My IDE and my (other) colleagues aren't - and yes, I am aware of the crap link color handling even though every jsp also has css included...
       
        <BODY ALINK="#993333"  BGCOLOR="#DFD1AD" topmargin=0 leftmargin=0 rightmargin=0 onload="initialiseForm(insertMenu, '<%=subcommand%>')" leftONLOAD="MM_showHideLayers('parent.frames[\'left\'].document.layers[\'Layer1\'][0]','parent.frames[\'left\'].document.all[\'Layer1\'][0]','hide')" LINK="000000" VLINK="#8F7134" ALINK="#333333">  
       
    4. Some sample logging (from production system supplied to client)

    System.out.println("Srini 1");

    do something (1 thing only, mind you...)

    System.out.println("Srini 2");


    System.out.println("Srini 3");


    System.out.println("Srini 4");


    System.out.println("Srini 5");

    etc...



  • @wiggzie said:

    He left on Friday, I got stuck with making some updates to an existing system...here are a few code samples I came across today...

    1. He was a bit of a whizz with SQL...and no, there is no valid reason for this crap...

    This is typical for ad-hoc statements (making an already written query a subquery is easier than turning it into a join), but shouldn't make it into production code.

       

    2. ???????
       
        Calendar todaysDate = Calendar.getInstance();
        Date trialTime = new Date();
        todaysDate.setTime(trialTime);

    Obviously didn't know the default value of Calendar.getInstance()


       
    4. Some sample logging (from production system supplied to client)

    System.out.println("Srini 1");

    do something (1 thing only, mind you...)

    System.out.println("Srini 2");


    System.out.println("Srini 3");


    System.out.println("Srini 4");


    System.out.println("Srini 5");

    etc...



    That's what people did in C, when a program crash wasn't that easy to pinpoint in the code. Obviously useless in Java. Obviously not usefull in production code, though that stuff is often forgotten.


  •    

    This is typical for ad-hoc statements (making an already written query a subquery is easier than turning it into a join), but shouldn't make it into production code.

    There are 152 occurances of selects within selects...



    That's what people did in C, when a program crash wasn't that easy to pinpoint in the code. Obviously useless in Java. Obviously not usefull in production code, though that stuff is often forgotten.

    that's why we use log 4 j...

     



  • @wiggzie said:

    that's why we use log 4 j...



    Even without that, such dense trace statements are useless in Java. In C, it was usefull because the program run might look like that:

    $ ./foobar
    segmentation fault
    $

    With such trace statements, it turns into that:

    $ ./foobar
    Erich 1
    Erich 2
    Erich 3
    segmentation fault
    $

    So whatever code is between "Erich 3" and "Erich 4", it's the point where the program crashes. In Java, you'll always get a stack trace, no need for such tricks.



  • @ammoQ said:



       
    4. Some sample logging (from production system supplied to client)

    System.out.println("Srini 1");

    do something (1 thing only, mind you...)

    System.out.println("Srini 2");


    System.out.println("Srini 3");


    System.out.println("Srini 4");


    System.out.println("Srini 5");

    etc...



    That's what people did in C, when a program crash wasn't that easy to pinpoint in the code. Obviously useless in Java. Obviously not usefull in production code, though that stuff is often forgotten.


    This is necessary in C only when you have an environment that lacks a proper debugger. I had to do this several times in a playstation game, but at least I didn't commit it after the problem was found.

    It could be useful in java aswell, mind you, if you're in a situation where you can't run the code in a debugger and the crash isn't an exception but an infinite loop or a deadlock.


  • @ammoQ said:

    This is typical for ad-hoc statements (making an already written query a subquery is easier than turning it into a join), but shouldn't make it into production code.

      

    Do you think it would make a difference?  I recon the optimiser would resolve them the same anyway.

    I must confess to doing some weird stuff like this.  I had to create some SQL to achieve something behind an interface, so I had something like 3 parameters that would magically get assigned to a ? in a particular order.  Unfortunately the SQL got a bit gnarly because I couldn't easily get the sequence right and ended up doing some quite unnecessary stuff just to get around it.



  • leftONLOAD


    Possibly a ditzy way of disabling thus "commenting" an event.



  • @LoztInSpace said:

    Do you think it would make a difference?  I recon the optimiser would resolve them the same anyway.



    Maybe, maybe not. Nesting subqueries means nested loops in a certain layout, dictated by the query.
    If it was a join instead, the optimizer might, based on the statistics, choose another strategy, e.g. full table scans, followed by a hash join.
    Or nested loops with the other table doing the outer loop.



  • Another gem:

    <FONT color=#000080 size=2>

    for</FONT><FONT size=2>(</FONT><FONT color=#000080 size=2>int </FONT><FONT size=2>i=0;i < 4;i++) {

    </FONT><FONT color=#000080 size=2>

    switch</FONT><FONT size=2>(i) {

    </FONT><FONT color=#000080 size=2>

    case </FONT><FONT size=2>0 : </FONT><FONT color=#000080 size=2>if</FONT><FONT size=2>(search_start_month == </FONT><FONT color=#000080 size=2>null</FONT><FONT size=2>) {

    search_start_month = </FONT><FONT color=#008000 size=2>""</FONT><FONT size=2>;

    }

    </FONT><FONT color=#000080 size=2>

    break</FONT><FONT size=2>;

    </FONT><FONT color=#000080 size=2>

    case </FONT><FONT size=2>1 : </FONT><FONT color=#000080 size=2>if</FONT><FONT size=2>(search_start_year == </FONT><FONT color=#000080 size=2>null</FONT><FONT size=2>) {

    search_start_year = </FONT><FONT color=#008000 size=2>""</FONT><FONT size=2>;

    }

    </FONT><FONT color=#000080 size=2>

    break</FONT><FONT size=2>;

    </FONT><FONT color=#000080 size=2>

    case </FONT><FONT size=2>2 : </FONT><FONT color=#000080 size=2>if</FONT><FONT size=2>(search_end_month == </FONT><FONT color=#000080 size=2>null</FONT><FONT size=2>) {

    search_end_month = </FONT><FONT color=#008000 size=2>""</FONT><FONT size=2>;

    }

    </FONT><FONT color=#000080 size=2>

    break</FONT><FONT size=2>;

    </FONT><FONT color=#000080 size=2>

    case </FONT><FONT size=2>3 : </FONT><FONT color=#000080 size=2>if</FONT><FONT size=2>(search_end_year == </FONT><FONT color=#000080 size=2>null</FONT><FONT size=2>) {

    search_end_year = </FONT><FONT color=#008000 size=2>""</FONT><FONT size=2>;

    }

    </FONT><FONT color=#000080 size=2>

    break</FONT><FONT size=2>;

    }

    }

    </FONT>


  • @wiggzie said:

    Another gem:

    <font color="#000080" size="2">
    </font>

    <font color="#000080" size="2">for</font><font size="2">(</font><font color="#000080" size="2">int </font><font size="2">i=0;i < 4;i++) {</font>

    <font color="#000080" size="2">
    </font>

    <font color="#000080" size="2">switch</font><font size="2">(i) {</font>

    <font size="2">...
    </font>

    <font color="#000080" size="2"></font>


    Ah, the classical for-switch-construct. The sure mind of an insane mind.



  • The sure sign of an insane mind.



  • The sure mind of an insane sign?



  • @wiggzie said:

    He was a bit of a whizz with SQL...

    Your colleague was a squirt of urine? Interesting. :)


Log in to reply
 

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