Another weby 2.0 pig



  • Just thought I would write a quick note about a web application that was made using asp.net.  <?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p>

    This web application supports everything company WTF does.  CMS, Financials, leads, contacts, customers, etc.   <o:p></o:p>

    It makes full use of the "Viewstate".   This saved the programmer a lot of time and from that respect it was ok<o:p></o:p>

    But when I found out that people started using TS to access the web app I couldn't understand why.<o:p></o:p>

    The pages didn’t have that much on them either.  Just a few windows (layers) that you can move around, databound grids, buttons, and user controls. But, for some reason my notepad crashed every time I tried to view the source and I couldn't figure out why.   After some investigations I realized that the viewstate on the page was over 10 pages long.    Each page was about 800K.<o:p></o:p>

    Do I blame the programmer for this? No, I don't.  He had a very limited time to complete the project and a very small budget.  Using the quick and dirty viewstate solution provided by Microsoft was a logical choice.   The end result however was a system that people couldn't use all the time over the line.   All I have to say is thank you Microsoft for your wonderful cluster fuck.  Now I have to support all these quick and dirty applications that you are encouraging.   MS needs to stop writing quick and dirty programming tools.        

    Finally, this is the second posting on this form in the last week regarding someone using TS to access a asp.net application.    <o:p></o:p>

     

     

     

     



  • @Kev777 said:

    Just thought I would write a quick note about a web application that was made using asp.net.  <?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p>

    This web application supports everything company WTF does.  CMS, Financials, leads, contacts, customers, etc.   <o:p></o:p>

    It makes full use of the "Viewstate".   This saved the programmer a lot of time and from that respect it was ok<o:p></o:p>

    But when I found out that people started using TS to access the web app I couldn't understand why.<o:p></o:p>

    The pages didn’t have that much on them either.  Just a few windows (layers) that you can move around, databound grids, buttons, and user controls. But, for some reason my notepad crashed every time I tried to view the source and I couldn't figure out why.   After some investigations I realized that the viewstate on the page was over 10 pages long.    Each page was about 800K.<o:p></o:p>

    Do I blame the programmer for this? No, I don't.  He had a very limited time to complete the project and a very small budget.  Using the quick and dirty viewstate solution provided by Microsoft was a logical choice.   The end result however was a system that people couldn't use all the time over the line.   All I have to say is thank you Microsoft for your wonderful cluster fuck.  Now I have to support all these quick and dirty applications that you are encouraging.   MS needs to stop writing quick and dirty programming tools.        

    Finally, this is the second posting on this form in the last week regarding someone using TS to access a asp.net application.   

     

    I question your conclusion.  Actually, I don't question it, it think it is one of the dumbest things I've ever read.  You're blaming the programming tool for writing a crappy, slow application?  What if I wrote an app in C, that allocated memory and forgot to release it, also known as a memory leak, would you blame C or would you blame me?    With your logic above the programming tool should recognize a bad programmer and fix his bad code.  What about a web-site developer that plastered huge 1MB images all over his site?  Would you blame dreamweaver or whatever tool he was using to build the site?  Put blame where blame is due.<o:p></o:p>

    For the issue above, blame should rest solely on the developer's shoulders, and no one/nothing else.  <o:p></o:p>

    <o:p> </o:p>



  • @Kev777 said:

    Do I blame the programmer for this? No, I don't.  He had a very limited time to complete the project and a very small budget.  Using the quick and dirty viewstate solution provided by Microsoft was a logical choice.   The end result however was a system that people couldn't use all the time over the line.   All I have to say is thank you Microsoft for your wonderful cluster fuck.  Now I have to support all these quick and dirty applications that you are encouraging.   MS needs to stop writing quick and dirty programming tools.        

     

    I was running late while driving to work, so I cut through a playground going 90mph, killing 15 children. 

    Which, of course, is the fault of the Nissan corporation.  Those bastards should be in jail.



  • @mooney said:

    @Kev777 said:

    Do I blame the programmer for this? No, I don't.  He had a very limited time to complete the project and a very small budget.  Using the quick and dirty viewstate solution provided by Microsoft was a logical choice.   The end result however was a system that people couldn't use all the time over the line.   All I have to say is thank you Microsoft for your wonderful cluster fuck.  Now I have to support all these quick and dirty applications that you are encouraging.   MS needs to stop writing quick and dirty programming tools.        

     

    I was running late while driving to work, so I cut through a playground going 90mph, killing 15 children. 

    Which, of course, is the fault of the Nissan corporation.  Those bastards should be in jail.

     

    No you didn't quite get that right.

    Again this is NOT the fault of the programmer.  It is the fault of microsoft for selling 'Cars' without horns, seatbelts, and brakes.      Sure they will get you to your destination quickl, but you may end up killing a few children in the process and crashing into the doors of your workplace.

     



  • @mooney said:

    @Kev777 said:

    Do I blame the programmer for this? No, I don't.  He had a very limited time to complete the project and a very small budget.  Using the quick and dirty viewstate solution provided by Microsoft was a logical choice.   The end result however was a system that people couldn't use all the time over the line.   All I have to say is thank you Microsoft for your wonderful cluster fuck.  Now I have to support all these quick and dirty applications that you are encouraging.   MS needs to stop writing quick and dirty programming tools.        

     

    I was running late while driving to work, so I cut through a playground going 90mph, killing 15 children. 

    Which, of course, is the fault of the Nissan corporation.  Those bastards should be in jail.

    Don't you think the kids have suffered too much to be run over and then put in jail on top of that?



  • @Kev777 said:

    Just thought I would write a quick note about a web application that was made using asp.net.  <o:p></o:p>

    This web application supports everything company WTF does.  CMS, Financials, leads, contacts, customers, etc.   <o:p></o:p>

    It makes full use of the "Viewstate".   This saved the programmer a lot of time and from that respect it was ok<o:p></o:p>

    But when I found out that people started using TS to access the web app I couldn't understand why.<o:p></o:p>

    The pages didn’t have that much on them either.  Just a few windows (layers) that you can move around, databound grids, buttons, and user controls. But, for some reason my notepad crashed every time I tried to view the source and I couldn't figure out why.   After some investigations I realized that the viewstate on the page was over 10 pages long.    Each page was about 800K.<o:p></o:p>

    Do I blame the programmer for this? No, I don't.  He had a very limited time to complete the project and a very small budget.  Using the quick and dirty viewstate solution provided by Microsoft was a logical choice.   The end result however was a system that people couldn't use all the time over the line.   All I have to say is thank you Microsoft for your wonderful cluster fuck.  Now I have to support all these quick and dirty applications that you are encouraging.   MS needs to stop writing quick and dirty programming tools.        

    Finally, this is the second posting on this form in the last week regarding someone using TS to access a asp.net application. 



    The real WTF is that you don't blame the programmer? Are you the programmer?

    Mike Rod


  • @Kev777 said:

    @mooney said:
    @Kev777 said:

    Do I blame the programmer for this? No, I don't.  He had a very limited time to complete the project and a very small budget.  Using the quick and dirty viewstate solution provided by Microsoft was a logical choice.   The end result however was a system that people couldn't use all the time over the line.   All I have to say is thank you Microsoft for your wonderful cluster fuck.  Now I have to support all these quick and dirty applications that you are encouraging.   MS needs to stop writing quick and dirty programming tools.        

     

    I was running late while driving to work, so I cut through a playground going 90mph, killing 15 children. 

    Which, of course, is the fault of the Nissan corporation.  Those bastards should be in jail.

    No you didn't quite get that right.

    Again this is NOT the fault of the programmer.  It is the fault of microsoft for selling 'Cars' without horns, seatbelts, and brakes.      Sure they will get you to your destination quickl, but you may end up killing a few children in the process and crashing into the doors of your workplace.

    OK, so your point is not that it ViewState allows people to write crappy code, but that it practically forces them to write crappy code?

    I can't imagine that would actually be your point, because that you mean that you're a idiot.  If a developer is not dumber than a box of rocks, he or she is more than capable of using the ViewState effectively and efficiently.

    So, please, clearify WTF you are talking about.



  • @kswanton said:

    @Kev777 said:

    Just thought I would write a quick note about a web application that was made using asp.net.  <?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p>

    This web application supports everything company WTF does.  CMS, Financials, leads, contacts, customers, etc.   <o:p></o:p>

    It makes full use of the "Viewstate".   This saved the programmer a lot of time and from that respect it was ok<o:p></o:p>

    But when I found out that people started using TS to access the web app I couldn't understand why.<o:p></o:p>

    The pages didn’t have that much on them either.  Just a few windows (layers) that you can move around, databound grids, buttons, and user controls. But, for some reason my notepad crashed every time I tried to view the source and I couldn't figure out why.   After some investigations I realized that the viewstate on the page was over 10 pages long.    Each page was about 800K.<o:p></o:p>

    Do I blame the programmer for this? No, I don't.  He had a very limited time to complete the project and a very small budget.  Using the quick and dirty viewstate solution provided by Microsoft was a logical choice.   The end result however was a system that people couldn't use all the time over the line.   All I have to say is thank you Microsoft for your wonderful cluster fuck.  Now I have to support all these quick and dirty applications that you are encouraging.   MS needs to stop writing quick and dirty programming tools.        

    Finally, this is the second posting on this form in the last week regarding someone using TS to access a asp.net application.   

     

    I question your conclusion.  Actually, I don't question it, it think it is one of the dumbest things I've ever read.  You're blaming the programming tool for writing a crappy, slow application?  What if I wrote an app in C, that allocated memory and forgot to release it, also known as a memory leak, would you blame C or would you blame me?    With your logic above the programming tool should recognize a bad programmer and fix his bad code.  What about a web-site developer that plastered huge 1MB images all over his site?  Would you blame dreamweaver or whatever tool he was using to build the site?  Put blame where blame is due.<o:p></o:p>

    For the issue above, blame should rest solely on the developer's shoulders, and no one/nothing else.  <o:p></o:p>

     

    The fact is the programming tool does write slow applications.     How is that not a fact?

     

    Let me correct your example

    It wouldn't be the programmers fault if he wrote a C application that used a code generator tool and a UI Web libaray that had memory leaks.    The base code of your C appliction that you wrote is the only thing you can be blamed for.    

    Common sense tells me that if you are going to create a programming tool for web application development it MUST not produce bloated html.  At the very least ,there should be some safe guards to prevent bad programmers from abusing the tool.

    Any experienced web developer knows that the vast majority of corporate web applications are total trash.   The reason for this is that companies don't have the time and money to spend creating a well written system.   Programmers are forced to rush or the company fails to hire a real professional.  That is the real world and microsft isn't helping out with.   The more quick and dirty tools they make the more trash there will be.

    Microsoft is 100% guilty of creating tools that facilitate quick and dirty programming.

    Most of these guys creating web formscan't even pass the simple html test.   Ask them to write an html document with their name in bold using note pad.  They can't do it.   I'M NOT JOKING!!!!

     

     

     

     

     

     



  • @mooney said:

    @Kev777 said:
    @mooney said:
    @Kev777 said:

    Do I blame the programmer for this? No, I don't.  He had a very limited time to complete the project and a very small budget.  Using the quick and dirty viewstate solution provided by Microsoft was a logical choice.   The end result however was a system that people couldn't use all the time over the line.   All I have to say is thank you Microsoft for your wonderful cluster fuck.  Now I have to support all these quick and dirty applications that you are encouraging.   MS needs to stop writing quick and dirty programming tools.        

     

    I was running late while driving to work, so I cut through a playground going 90mph, killing 15 children. 

    Which, of course, is the fault of the Nissan corporation.  Those bastards should be in jail.

    No you didn't quite get that right.

    Again this is NOT the fault of the programmer.  It is the fault of microsoft for selling 'Cars' without horns, seatbelts, and brakes.      Sure they will get you to your destination quickl, but you may end up killing a few children in the process and crashing into the doors of your workplace.

    OK, so your point is not that it ViewState allows people to write crappy code, but that it practically forces them to write crappy code?

    I can't imagine that would actually be your point, because that you mean that you're a idiot.  If a developer is not dumber than a box of rocks, he or she is more than capable of using the ViewState effectively and efficiently.

    So, please, clearify WTF you are talking about.

    My point is that far too many people don't even realize how dangerous to have a car without breaks.  

    In other words they don't understand what the viewstate is because they are GUI programmers.   The click and drag the control on to the form and think "I can program!" 

    These are the kinds of programmers that are out there.  

    Again, these programmers are not forced to use these tools and they are not forced to write crappy code, but crappy code is the default.     Most programmers trust that microsofts default code generators are going to be valid, but that isn't the case.   

     

     



  • @Kev777 said:

    @mooney said:
    @Kev777 said:
    @mooney said:
    @Kev777 said:

    Do I blame the programmer for this? No, I don't.  He had a very limited time to complete the project and a very small budget.  Using the quick and dirty viewstate solution provided by Microsoft was a logical choice.   The end result however was a system that people couldn't use all the time over the line.   All I have to say is thank you Microsoft for your wonderful cluster fuck.  Now I have to support all these quick and dirty applications that you are encouraging.   MS needs to stop writing quick and dirty programming tools.        

     

    I was running late while driving to work, so I cut through a playground going 90mph, killing 15 children. 

    Which, of course, is the fault of the Nissan corporation.  Those bastards should be in jail.

    No you didn't quite get that right.

    Again this is NOT the fault of the programmer.  It is the fault of microsoft for selling 'Cars' without horns, seatbelts, and brakes.      Sure they will get you to your destination quickl, but you may end up killing a few children in the process and crashing into the doors of your workplace.

    OK, so your point is not that it ViewState allows people to write crappy code, but that it practically forces them to write crappy code?

    I can't imagine that would actually be your point, because that you mean that you're a idiot.  If a developer is not dumber than a box of rocks, he or she is more than capable of using the ViewState effectively and efficiently.

    So, please, clearify WTF you are talking about.

    My point is that far too many people don't even realize how dangerous to have a car without breaks.  

    In other words they don't understand what the viewstate is because they are GUI programmers.   The click and drag the control on to the form and think "I can program!" 

    These are the kinds of programmers that are out there.  

    Again, these programmers are not forced to use these tools and they are not forced to write crappy code, but crappy code is the default.     Most programmers trust that microsofts default code generators are going to be valid, but that isn't the case.   

    OK then, you're an idiot.  Thank you for clarifying.

    Stop blaming Microsoft for your crappy code, it's not their job to protect you from yourself.

    If you don't know how to use ViewState correctly, you should not be programming ASP.NET applications.  If you misuse it, it is noone's fault but your own.

    If you pour a bottle of water on your server and get electrocuted, it is not Dell's fault for not making their computers waterproof, it's your fault for being a jackass.

    And stop pretending like this was some developer other than you.  The facade belittles us all.



  • Re: Another web 2.0 pig

    @mooney said:

    ...If a developer is not dumber than a box of rocks, he or she is more than capable of using the ViewState effectively and efficiently....

    <font size="5">N</font>ever underestimate the intelligence of a box of rocks.



  • [quote user=""]

    Most of these guys creating web formscan't even pass the simple html test.   Ask them to write an html document with their name in bold using note pad.  They can't do it.   I'M NOT JOKING!!!!

    [/quote]

    Holy **** - I'm not a web programmer, and know virtually nothing about HTML, let alone css, and even I can do that in notepad.



  • @triso said:

    @mooney said:
    ...If a developer is not dumber than a box of rocks, he or she is more than capable of using the ViewState effectively and efficiently....

    <FONT size=5>N</FONT>ever underestimate the intelligence of a box of rocks.

    Niiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiice quote!



  • That was the test that we gave the people we interviewed for the position of web developer and most of them failed!

    These people even had university degrees. One of them was from IBM!

     

     



  • I totally agree that if you don't know how to use the viewstate correctly that you shouldn't be programming in asp.net.

    The problem is that any jack ass that knows how to drag and drop a control on a web form can make a simple site with the tools microsoft provides.

    This is infact the kind of thing that microsoft is promoting.   They want to make it easy for people with little programming experience to create microsoft programs. 

    Of course, you are jumping to false conslusions.   I'm simply posting the details of an existing system that I will soon inherit.  I just found it funny that previously there was a post about someone who used TS access asp.net application.  and then I found out it was happening at my company too.

    I'll bet there are many poorly written asp.net web applications that are suffering from the same fate.

     



  • "I totally agree that if you don't know how to use the viewstate correctly that you shouldn't be programming in asp.net.

    The problem is that any jack ass that knows how to drag and drop a control on a web form can make a simple site with the tools microsoft provides."

    Yeah.  We should totally ban all languages more powerful than assembly.  In fact, that's too easy.  Everyone should have to code in a hex editor.  That way only people who really know what they're doing can put anything together.

    If your management isn't giving developers the time/resources necessary to get projects done correctly, that's management's fault, not Microsoft's.



  • @Kev777 said:

    Again, these programmers are not forced to use these tools and they are not forced to write crappy code, but crappy code is the default.     Most programmers trust that microsofts default code generators are going to be valid, but that isn't the case.   

    <FONT face=Tahoma>Most controls when generated are infact valid. Adding a textbox in a form certainly has its viewstate enabled, otherwise what is that textbox for? Now how about adding a thousand textbox with all of their viewstate enabled? Would you blame microsoft for making the viewstate's default to true?

    The same goes for the rest, they are there for a valid reason, provided the context of its usage is correct...

    It should be the responsibility of the programmer to know what are they for and when to use them...



    </FONT>



  • It's really not that hard, let's explore internet!

    www.msdn.com --> "Patterns & practices" --> (on the right) Focus on... "Web Applications"

    Now you are on the following link:

    http://msdn.microsoft.com/practices/apptype/webapps/

    Even more, let me click the "Start Here" button for you:

    http://msdn.microsoft.com/practices/apptype/webapps/default.aspx?pull=/library/en-us/dnpag/html/diforwc.asp

    It's not a very long read, but I specially recommend the "Chapter 5: Managing State in Web Applications"

    Please encourage your "Programmer" to read, at the very least, this chapter and make the world a better place, thanks in advance

    Mike Rod

    PS: Just because the feature is there, it doesn't mean you must use it and no, "it's the default" is not an excuse



  • Page sizes can be kept down by storing the view state on the server rather than senodng it to the client:

    <FONT face="Courier New">LoadPageStateFromPersistenceMedium <- there is also a method to save it...</FONT>

    Your argument really isnt that good.



  • I love to see people bashing MS. Yes you can write awful programs using ASP.NET or VB, but you can write terrible stuff in virtually any language and there are no exceptions.

    About your application: implement a ViewState manager and replace this 8+MB viewstate with an index and store it somewhere on the server. How about that? Or just change the way this application is using ViewState? Or explain to the management how bad it is and write one yourself.

    The fault is not the tool you use, it's you. If you kill someone using a knife should we stop using knives or it's you who's fault it is? (Same with the Nissan example).

     

    Wake up man, wake up... bitching about MS isn't helping you in anyway nor you will look really l33t or something...



  • <title>"This was coded by design."</title>

    You mean our browsers are NOT the operating system?



  • What does this have to do with Web 2.0?



    And, totally off the cuff, why does notepad crash for you loading a 800
    KB file?  I do realize that Notepad kind of sucked on the Win9x
    line, but on the WinNT line, Notepad has never given me problems. 
    Which I kind of expect, seeing as it does so little.  But I
    frequently open 30 MB log files and have never seen Notepad crash.




  • 1st: I had opened mbs docs with notepad, it works fine

    2nd: 800kb of ViewState -> Did some moron activate ViewState on EVERY object in the page? And you blame Microsoft for that?

       I'm pretty sure that if I use C++ and do a memalloc of 100 times the size of the object I will end up with an app that consumes a lot of memory, if you tell the asp to use ViewState on every object you will get what you want (ViewState for every object).

      So we have two different paths:

        - You used ViewState on every object because you need to keep track of every change on everything on the page; so it will be correct to have an 800kb viewstate

       - You used ViewState on every object because you didn't know how to disable it on the objects that aren't important

      Then you take the app to the customer site and:

          -this is your app 

          - WTF? this takes a hell to load

          - It worked well on my momma pc

      You go home and notice the viewstate size and think: Should I learnt how to use a tool before using it or can I blame Microsoft for it... I will take the second.

    Microsoft does lots of bad software, but the programming tools isn't one of those programs (when used correctly)



  • Ever heard of using the right tool for the right job?

    So you think ASP.NET is quick and dirty (which is definatley isn't)... so what... you're not being forced to use it, use something that isn't quick and dirty... like php or perl (!!!)

    Also, dragging controls mindlessly onto a page will not affect the viewstate for the majority of controls... Binding controls to data sources (which is not mindless and should be done with a good architecture) adds to the viewstate.

    Finally, unless you want a f-ugly and uncompliant site you NEED to know basic web development practices in order to create ASP.NET applications, if you've hired someone that doesn't then you're the jackass, not them.



  • @Oscar L said:

    @mooney said:
    @Kev777 said:

    Do I blame the programmer for this? No, I don't.  He had a very limited time to complete the project and a very small budget.  Using the quick and dirty viewstate solution provided by Microsoft was a logical choice.   The end result however was a system that people couldn't use all the time over the line.   All I have to say is thank you Microsoft for your wonderful cluster fuck.  Now I have to support all these quick and dirty applications that you are encouraging.   MS needs to stop writing quick and dirty programming tools.        

     

    I was running late while driving to work, so I cut through a playground going 90mph, killing 15 children. 

    Which, of course, is the fault of the Nissan corporation.  Those bastards should be in jail.

    Don't you think the kids have suffered too much to be run over and then put in jail on top of that?

    Hahahahaha! I think you missed the point. If the kids had been in jail, they wouldn't have been hit by a car in the playground.

    I whole hearedly agree with the original post here. I get really s**tty with MS for creating these tools.

    I do however think that their biggest evil is not with the development of these tools, but the marketing that convinces idiot pointy haired bosses that they can create their own website with Frontpage, or misrepresents the actual capabilities of DTS packages in SQL Server or just plain lies about the configurability of BizTalk (I am referring to last years offerings, not really interested in anything they have anymore).

    I'm also sh**ty about these idiots who study things like those "Marketing, Web Design and E-commerce" type courses at University and come out thinking that they are qualified to develop actual web content, not realizing that all they have done is allowed themselves to be squeezed through a corporate sponsored meat mincer and packed into pig gut. I spoke to one such the other evening who didn't know what Firefox is. Had no idea about the actual "code" that makes a web page look they way it does, or that HTML is a language that describes layout as much as it is a file format. He did know how to draw boxes and type into a MS GUI and save as HTML. University educated, mind you.

    Not trying to troll here, but seriously, MS does have a lot to answer for in lowering technical standards accross the industry and around the world. To take the above car analogies a step further, they hand keys from 30 wheel roadtrains with automatic transmition to 5 year old deaf and blind chimpanzees and say "here you go kiddo, you don't even need a lincense to drive this baby!", all so said chimpanzee can drive one and a half blocks to buy a banana.

    Then again, if it wasn't for them, we probably would have nearly as much entertainment on the pages of TDWTF.



  • @Some Idiot said:

    Not trying to troll here, but seriously, MS does have a lot to answer for in lowering technical standards accross the industry and around the world. To take the above car analogies a step further, they hand keys from 30 wheel roadtrains with automatic transmition to 5 year old deaf and blind chimpanzees and say "here you go kiddo, you don't even need a lincense to drive this baby!", all so said chimpanzee can drive one and a half blocks to buy a banana.

    By lowering technical standards we got a bigger user base, with a bigger user base we got lower pc prices, with lower pc prices we got the tool we needed for the work we do. Returning to the bigger user base, it leads us to a bigger customer base that pays our salaries.

    I'm sure that the computer industry will get to the same point as it's today if Microsoft didn't exist, but MS make it reach this point sooner, be it for good or not.

    @Some Idiot said:

    Then again, if it wasn't for them, we probably would have nearly as much entertainment on the pages of TDWTF.

    An idiot is capable of wtf in whatever language/technology that ever existed, but I have to recognize that it's easier to be a wtf-er in Microsoft technologies than others. <Just to make Jeff S join the discussion>Specially in VB </Just to make Jeff S join the discussion>



  • @Taliesin said:

    @Some Idiot said:

    Not trying to troll here, but seriously, MS does have a lot to answer for in lowering technical standards accross the industry and around the world. To take the above car analogies a step further, they hand keys from 30 wheel roadtrains with automatic transmition to 5 year old deaf and blind chimpanzees and say "here you go kiddo, you don't even need a lincense to drive this baby!", all so said chimpanzee can drive one and a half blocks to buy a banana.

    By lowering technical standards we got a bigger user base, with a bigger user base we got lower pc prices, with lower pc prices we got the tool we needed for the work we do. Returning to the bigger user base, it leads us to a bigger customer base that pays our salaries.

    I'm sure that the computer industry will get to the same point as it's today if Microsoft didn't exist, but MS make it reach this point sooner, be it for good or not.

    I think the computer industry was heading the way it headed anyway, and at the same rate. We might be using some flavour of OS/2 or maybe Amiga or Apple would have done better if Microsoft hadn't existed. IT was going to take off and from what I remember of the late eighties desktop PC market, MS had positioned themselves as the best for business desktop computing while Apple and Amiga seemed to be going for desktop publishing and what became multimedia.

    All those cheap clones were happening way back. MS had little to do with driving down hardware prices. The demand was there anyway. Sun was big in the whole internet game before MS understood what it was, and that publicity was a major factor in driving down PC prices by creating demand for the internet.

    Again, I'm not trying to be one of these "anti-Microsoft" types, but I don't owe them anything and from my personal point of view they have done more to hinder my day to day interaction with IT than help it. Microsoft follows trends, then jumps up and down and makes a big "We're innovating" kind of song and dance and people believe it.

    Like what's with this new 3D desktop crap in Vista that is going to ensure that every grandparents PC bought at *insert over-priced crap electronics chain here* is going be responsible for the release of a whole lot more greenhouse gas for just sitting there looking pretty. That's going to be turned on by default in all the new PCs sold to idiots. Do you realise how many idiots there are out there? I'm not alone.

    @Taliesin said:

    @Some Idiot said:

    Then again, if it wasn't for them, we probably would have nearly as much entertainment on the pages of TDWTF.

    An idiot is capable of wtf in whatever language/technology that ever existed, but I have to recognize that it's easier to be a wtf-er in Microsoft technologies than others. <Just to make Jeff S join the discussion>Specially in VB </Just to make Jeff S join the discussion>

    I'm most certainly capable of WTFs in many languages including English.

    Where I come from, VB is a beer. A cheap, low quality beer. Prolonged use of either will have an identical effect on the human brain.

    Okay, so now I am trolling. (you there Jeff S?)

    I would prefer it if the chimpanzee would just ride the frickin Unixycle instead of driving the truck.



  • Again, I'm not trying to be one of these "anti-Microsoft" types, but I don't owe them anything and from my personal point of view they have done more to hinder my day to day interaction with IT than help it. Microsoft follows trends, then jumps up and down and makes a big "We're innovating" kind of song and dance and people believe it.

    From my POV nobody should be a pro/anti - (company name), and that's because no company will do anything for you; they only do things that are good for themselves. A different topic is if Microsoft has done anything good for IT or not; I think that MS has done lots of useful things for the computer industry and I love when people say: "I don't need MS because I run everything in Linux/Unix" I always have the same answer: "And your customers?" even if your customers run everythin in Linux do they customers also use Linux?. Even if today we can change a Windows XP for one of the latest SUSE versions without too much trouble for the final user we have to take some perspective and thing about it five years ago. When I was studying at the Unversity (physics for me) we all used Linux in our houses but I needed about 6 straight ours to install Slackware.

    Do you really think that the price that I paid for the computer (around 1000$) will be the same if there wasn't (literally) hundreds of people buying the same computers? (in their cases they bought the computer because Windows allowed them to actually USE it).

    My point is with the time; Windows simply make it happen faster. More on it: if the computers didn't get cheaper because of the existence of Windows I didn't have one in my house and therefore I will have a different job today; so I owe something to Microsoft, be it directly or indirectly.

    (I also paid my debt to Microsoft because nowadays I program software that, sometimes, need MS software - .Net mostly)



  • I forgot to say that there are lots of other companies that had done a lot of things for the IT industry and even individuals that make the IT world a better world to live. I 'm completely sure that MS would prefer to stop developing Windows in Windows 3.1 if it weren't other companies also developing their own OS.

    I will not be fair if I don't remember the ones that get left behind in the IT road because of Microsoft (Netscape, BeOS,...) as, I said before, you should be no "pro-company" because no company is "pro-you"



  • @Taliesin said:

    My point is with the time; Windows simply make it happen faster. More on it: if the computers didn't get cheaper because of the existence of Windows I didn't have one in my house and therefore I will have a different job today; so I owe something to Microsoft, be it directly or indirectly.

    (I also paid my debt to Microsoft because nowadays I program software that, sometimes, need MS software - .Net mostly)



    Well, if MS had not brought us Windows, normal people might be using GEM instead, and Linux users would be anti-DR instead of anti-MS.


  • @Taliesin said:

    From my POV nobody should be a pro/anti - (company name), and that's because no company will do anything for you; they only do things that are good for themselves. A different topic is if Microsoft has done anything good for IT or not; I think that MS has done lots of useful things for the computer industry and I love when people say: "I don't need MS because I run everything in Linux/Unix" I always have the same answer: "And your customers?" even if your customers run everythin in Linux do they customers also use Linux?. Even if today we can change a Windows XP for one of the latest SUSE versions without too much trouble for the final user we have to take some perspective and thing about it five years ago. When I was studying at the Unversity (physics for me) we all used Linux in our houses but I needed about 6 straight ours to install Slackware.

    Do you really think that the price that I paid for the computer (around 1000$) will be the same if there wasn't (literally) hundreds of people buying the same computers? (in their cases they bought the computer because Windows allowed them to actually USE it).

    My point is with the time; Windows simply make it happen faster. More on it: if the computers didn't get cheaper because of the existence of Windows I didn't have one in my house and therefore I will have a different job today; so I owe something to Microsoft, be it directly or indirectly.

    (I also paid my debt to Microsoft because nowadays I program software that, sometimes, need MS software - .Net mostly)

    I agree that a pro/anti company company stance is a waste of time and energy. I also think that to a point, at least in IT, a pro/anti particular brand of technology stance can be counter productive.

    My point here, and the point of this thread as I understand it, is about the kludges that MS release. They release a lot of software that makes it easy to do this or that, and then market it to people who don't know what they are doing and train people who I think would be better at cleaning windows then programming Windows. This lowers the standard of software and is therefore a good thing for TDWTF.

    I personally use Linux because I have a home studio and I'm too cheap to shell out for a mac for my hobby. If there was a easy/cheap/legal way for me to run OSX on AMD, I would switch. People I know who are serious about music production tend to buy macs.

    I still don't believe that MS played any part in computers getting cheaper that would not have been played by someone else anyway. I don't think they accelerated it at all.

    And FYI, you don't necessarily need windows to run .net. 🙂



  • @Some Idiot said:

    My point here, and the point of this thread as I understand it, is about the kludges that MS release. They release a lot of software that makes it easy to do this or that, and then market it to people who don't know what they are doing and train people who I think would be better at cleaning windows then programming Windows. This lowers the standard of software and is therefore a good thing for TDWTF.

    WTF? You never worked on someone else's project? Something really really f**d up. The worst I ever saw were actually SQL statements and MS had nothing to do with this crap. By using .net as any other tool/programming language you may produce good and bad stuff. Take for example PHP - what if you decide to write everything on a few pages using cut-n-paste to distribute the "library"? I know many people who love PHP and don't have anything against putting a $ sign in front of every damn variable, having the code like spaghetti - code and html mixed up, initializing fields by opening server-side tags etc, etc, etc. So how is that better and reduces the WTF-ness of the code compared to MS.NET and highers the standarts for software?

    IMO Microsoft did a wonderful job with .NET and Visual Studio and at this point it's way beyond any comparable products and there isn't any IDE even close to it when it comes to writing and degugging code and especially web applications.



  • @nsimeonov said:

    @Some Idiot said:

    My point here, and the point of this thread as I understand it, is about the kludges that MS release. They release a lot of software that makes it easy to do this or that, and then market it to people who don't know what they are doing and train people who I think would be better at cleaning windows then programming Windows. This lowers the standard of software and is therefore a good thing for TDWTF.

    WTF? You never worked on someone else's project? Something really really f**d up. The worst I ever saw were actually SQL statements and MS had nothing to do with this crap. By using .net as any other tool/programming language you may produce good and bad stuff. Take for example PHP - what if you decide to write everything on a few pages using cut-n-paste to distribute the "library"? I know many people who love PHP and don't have anything against putting a $ sign in front of every damn variable, having the code like spaghetti - code and html mixed up, initializing fields by opening server-side tags etc, etc, etc. So how is that better and reduces the WTF-ness of the code compared to MS.NET and highers the standarts for software?

    IMO Microsoft did a wonderful job with .NET and Visual Studio and at this point it's way beyond any comparable products and there isn't any IDE even close to it when it comes to writing and degugging code and especially web applications.

    Oh yeah, PHP is high on the list of easy-to-produce-crap tools, and clearly from this site, a great source of WTFs. I didn't mention PHP, and I certainly wouldn't say it raises the standard of software development. Who markets PHP again? I'd hunt through IT magazines for a full page, glossy ad for PHP, but I have better things to do with the next eighty years. I'm sure if MS owned PHP, it would take seconds to find ads for it, plus there would be even more threads in TDWTF devoted to PHP stories. Sorry if you didn't read my previous posts.

    <FONT face="Times New Roman" size=3>I think CLI and C# are wonderful things, and .NET has pretty a damn fine implementation of each. Visual studio is okay as long as you stay within a limited toolset. For example, if you try to integrate VS.NET with any kind of professional quality source control system, you may start to see what I mean.</FONT>

    <FONT face="Times New Roman" size=3>Having used a few IDEs, my personal favourite is Eclipse. I don't need WYSIWYG web forms, and if I'm developing web applications, I may just want them to work nicely in Firefox, Safari, Konqueror and Opera as well as IE. VS.NET doesn't make that easy. Plus, Eclipse speaks more languages. That said, they both have their problems. I just don't see Eclipse marketed anywhere with the same "Even a chimpanzee could do it" attitude.</FONT>

    <FONT face="Times New Roman" size=3>Again, I'm not really trolling here. Please read the posts you are responding to carefully and think about them in the context of the thread.</FONT>



  • @Some Idiot said:

    Sorry if you didn't read my previous posts.

    Actually I'm reading every new post in this thread and I'm responding to your funny statements that MS is to blame for the tools allowing people to create shi**y programs. How comes that MS marketing VS.NET and putting ads in magazines does that?

     

    @Some Idiot said:

    <FONT face="Times New Roman" size=3>I think CLI and C# are wonderful things, and .NET has pretty a damn fine implementation of each. Visual studio is okay as long as you stay within a limited toolset. For example, if you try to integrate VS.NET with any kind of professional quality source control system, you may start to see what I mean.</FONT>

    <FONT face="Times New Roman" size=3>

    I used perforce in the past and I use VSS right now without any problems. My experience with CVS (without the integration, but using a server on the other side of the world) is very good as well - yes it had it's glitches and because the connection to the server was very slow we couldn't use from inside the IDE but that's what wincvs is for. Please explain...

    </FONT>

    <FONT face="Times New Roman" size=3></FONT> 

    @Some Idiot said:

    <FONT face="Times New Roman" size=3>Having used a few IDEs, my personal favourite is Eclipse. I don't need WYSIWYG web forms, and if I'm developing web applications, I may just want them to work nicely in Firefox, Safari, Konqueror and Opera as well as IE. VS.NET doesn't make that easy. Plus, Eclipse speaks more languages. That said, they both have their problems. I just don't see Eclipse marketed anywhere with the same "Even a chimpanzee could do it" attitude.</FONT>

    Well, I turned off the WYSIWYG option in VS.NET long ago and I keep working with the HTML directly and the only time I really need to switch from HTML to design mode is when I have to drag some component on the form or access it's properties however it has the irritating habbit to f**k up the html so usually what I do is just take a look at what I need then go back to html and type it myself the way I want. The point here is you have the option and you may or may not use it. Screaming out loud that MS gives tools to people who don't deserve it and because they have these tools they will create WTFs doesn't sound really logical. You can create as bigger WTFs with Eclypse and JSP as well with VS.NET. Here the example: I had a guy working for me who used to break the source lines in the middle because of his monitor... I found some javascript code like this:

    function foo()
    {document.getElementById("something").value = call_a_function(
    "param1", param2, param3); call_some_other_function(other_param1,
    other_param2, other_param3, etc.)}

    So how about that? Or writing a 10 line sql statement using the same approach? That does not relate to any IDE... when asking the guy why he did it this way his response was : "but it works now". I explained why it was bad and he said "ok I'll do it as you said in the future" (like a 5 years old kid that broke something and said "sorry daddy, I will not do that again") and 2 weeks later I saw the same thing in another sql statement.

     

    @Some Idiot said:

    I may just want them to work nicely in Firefox, Safari, Konqueror and Opera as well as IE. VS.NET doesn't make that easy.

    VS.NET doesn't make it easier, but does Eclypse? VS.NET makes it easier to use IE, I admit, but to achieve compatibility with ALL browsers including the ones on mobile phones you have to understand what is going on and how to design stuff. The key is the understanding and experience. If you believe that someone with less than a year experience will be able to create a web site looking about the same on all these browsers and making heavy use of CSS and JavaScript then you better go to a doctor to check yourself 🙂 Hey, just joking. 

    Take a look at the pricing for activewidgets.com for example and see what's the difference between the version supporting IE and FireFox and the one supporting IE,FF,Opera and Konqueror. If my memory serves it was about $400 vs $1600... (sorry just checked - they have a new version and changed the licensing etc so now it's $400 vs $2400 but the latest has a site license included not just a single developer... oh well)



  • @nsimeonov said:

    Actually I'm reading every new post in this thread and I'm responding to your funny statements that MS is to blame for the tools allowing people to create shi**y programs. How comes that MS marketing VS.NET and putting ads in magazines does that?

    Because people who have no way of knowing better believe they can do it. This is not just about VS.net, but about all development tools for idiots. MS just happens to make a lot of them, and they encourage idiots to use them because they profit from it.

    The marketing and hype for these tools is the highest for any tools I know of in IT. They number of idiot programmers that produce WTFs using these tools is the highest for any tools I know of, and tends to be higher by percentage because more idiots have the perception that using these tools constitutes the ability to program computers. This is not to say that all people that use these tools are idiots.

    Read the start of this thread again, then please re-read my previous posts. I refuse to engage in a "my tool's better than your tool" flame war. It's boring.

    @nsimeonov said:

    <FONT face="Times New Roman" size=3>

    I used perforce in the past and I use VSS right now without any problems. My experience with CVS (without the integration, but using a server on the other side of the world) is very good as well - yes it had it's glitches and because the connection to the server was very slow we couldn't use from inside the IDE but that's what wincvs is for. Please explain...

    </FONT>

    <FONT face="Times New Roman" size=3>

    </FONT>

    <FONT face="Times New Roman" size=3>This is getting very off topic but I'll bite. <offtopic>Of the version control systems you mention, I would consider perforce to be of professional quality. CVS is okay but a bit limited, VSS is again limited and has a few bugs that, while they only surface occasionally, can really cause major headaches for large projects with lots of users.</FONT>

    <FONT face="Times New Roman" size=3>I did a stint as p4d admin for a VS.NET project recently, which also involved my helping devs with using the version control. The headaches with integration in the IDE, especially for web projects, were incredibly painful. We ended up opting for the stand alone perforce clients (P4Win, I think). The best client I found in terms of stability and functionality was p4 cygwin et al on the command line.</offtopic></FONT>

    @nsimeonov said:

    Well, I turned off the WYSIWYG option in VS.NET long ago and I keep working with the HTML directly and the only time I really need to switch from HTML to design mode is when I have to drag some component on the form or access it's properties however it has the irritating habbit to f**k up the html so usually what I do is just take a look at what I need then go back to html and type it myself the way I want.......

    So you're saying you don't use all of the idiots tools. Okay........

    @nsimeonov said:

     The point here is you have the option and you may or may not use it. Screaming out loud that MS gives tools to people who don't deserve it and because they have these tools they will create WTFs doesn't sound really logical........

    ......... I explained why it was bad and he said "ok I'll do it as you said in the future" (like a 5 years old kid that broke something and said "sorry daddy, I will not do that again") and 2 weeks later I saw the same thing in another sql statement.

    I have not said it is not possible to create WTFs with other software tools. In fact it can be a lot of fun. I have deliberately created some doozies in the name of entertainment myself, and some of them have found their way into production systems (usually the ones that are coding-style WTFs rather than logical WTFs if you catch my drift). I went through a stage of writing for loops like this:

    <FONT face="Courier New" size=2>i = 300;
    for (;   i > -1   😉 {
       --i;
    }</FONT>

    ... all because the the code looks happier. I got so depressed looking at lines ending with the depressing "<FONT face="Courier New" size=2>);</FONT>" that when I got the chance to, I would go out of my way to put in a "<FONT face="Courier New" size=2>(;</FONT>" or "<FONT face="Courier New" size=2>;)</FONT>". Taken without that explaination, the code really made people mutter "WTF?". Oh, and I've written loops like that in Eclipse, VS.NET, notepad, vi and emacs to name a few. <FONT size=1>(I must try intelliJ Idea and see if it lets me type code like that in.....)</FONT>

    I'm not screaming about anything, I'm just saying we can be thankful to Microsoft for making it easier for stupid people to create stupid software, and trying to do it in a light-hearted, entertaining way.

    "Elvis Presley is dead, but not all of the class of dead people is Elvis Presley."



  • I see your point now and the logic behind it and I agree that it's dangerous to let people think they can do something when they don't understand basic concepts and how things wor. I had some people working for me (some of their WTFs Alex actually published) who did things that actually work and thanks god I have the habbit to check every damn line of code they give me, so I caught unimaginable things. I'm telling you - some people are not lazy and that is actually a bad thing, because if they were lazy they would have stopped and spent some time resting and thinking what they do. Oh well...

    Your happy code made me laugh out loud - you're the man of the day! Now that's a catch 🙂



  • @Some Idiot said:

    And FYI, you don't necessarily need windows to run .net. 🙂

    Did you ever tried Mono? because I did, so I tell my customers that they should use Windows; there's no problem for doing an app for Mono but it will take more time than doing it for Windows as Microsoft adds lots of classes that simplify my work so I have two options:

      - Charge more for my programming time and recommend Linux

      - Program less and recommed Windows (which, by the way, they have installed). Using Windows lowers the cost of my software which gives me (my company) more contracts



  • @Some Idiot said:

    The marketing and hype for these tools is the highest for any tools I know of in IT. They number of idiot programmers that produce WTFs using these tools is the highest for any tools I know of, and tends to be higher by percentage because more idiots have the perception that using these tools constitutes the ability to program computers. This is not to say that all people that use these tools are idiots.

    I have a question that has come to my mind after re-reading all the thread:

    Are you worried about the fact that lowering the entry point to use programming tools can corrupt the programming profession and allow any friend-of-the-cousin-of-the-chief to "steal" projects from our hands?

     



  • Are you worried about the fact that lowering the entry point to use
    programming tools can corrupt the programming profession and allow any
    friend-of-the-cousin-of-the-chief to "steal" projects from our hands?


    Not at all. Actually I hope that this happens as it happened in the past and when those people contact me again (and sure they will) my rates would be doubled in this case but they won't question that anymore. This happened in the past and I'm thankful to a couple of companies selling very cheap software here (total crap but for the price - who cares). Many customers asked me why is my price that high when they can buy the same from M*****t (sorry no names). My recommendation would be to check their products and if they like them to go ahead. Later on they come back ready to pay twice the price I offered initially just to switch to something that will work for them. Some actually don't come back and I'm happy that I didn't have to deal with cheap bastards who don't actually need the software in first place.



  • @Taliesin said:

    @Some Idiot said:

    And FYI, you don't necessarily need windows to run .net. 🙂

    Did you ever tried Mono? because I did, so I tell my customers that they should use Windows; there's no problem for doing an app for Mono but it will take more time than doing it for Windows as Microsoft adds lots of classes that simplify my work so I have two options:

      - Charge more for my programming time and recommend Linux

      - Program less and recommed Windows (which, by the way, they have installed). Using Windows lowers the cost of my software which gives me (my company) more contracts

    Yeah, I quite like mono now, it was painful to begin with, but even monodevelop has come a long way. Not quite at the VS.Net level, but it's getting a nice blend of features and stability. I highly recommend you have a look at the latest, including class libraries, and I understand you probably won't use it, and I may never use it professionally, but it is interesting nonetheless.

    Have you considered another option of charging even more for your programming and recommending OSX? That way, you can sit there with a grunty dual 64bit PPC with a sweet display. You may get fewer clients, but the ones you do get will expect to pay a premium and you'll have more spare time.

    My favourite ever dev environment was actually a box provided for testing. Our standard dev environment was XP, I was supplied with a big f-off mac for testing in safari. I quietly put my dev tools over to the mac and my productivity went up (shorter compile time plus the yummy goodness that is a unix shell for automating the drudgery). I didn't let on that I had changed environments, though, nor did I let on that I was working quicker. I had more spare time to play with the pretty system and that was nice.

    As far as being scared of idiots coming along to steal my jobs, no I'm not really worried. Firstly I'll happily work with .net, java, unix, windows whatever - I specialise in integration, so these idiots that live in a small, sandboxed area are less of a threat. Also, as nsimoenov said, the jobs that go away will come back at a higher price, plus there's the added warm fuzzy feeling I can get from grabbing code snippets from failed idiot projects and sending them to Alex to entertain the masses.



  • @Some Idiot said:

    @nsimeonov said:

    Take for example PHP - what if you decide to write everything on a few pages using cut-n-paste to distribute the "library"? I know many people who love PHP and don't have anything against putting a $ sign in front of every damn variable, having the code like spaghetti - code and html mixed up, initializing fields by opening server-side tags etc, etc, etc. So how is that better and reduces the WTF-ness of the code compared to MS.NET and highers the standarts for software?

    Oh yeah, PHP is high on the list of easy-to-produce-crap tools, and clearly from this site, a great source of WTFs. I didn't mention PHP, and I certainly wouldn't say it raises the standard of software development. Who markets PHP again? I'd hunt through IT magazines for a full page, glossy ad for PHP, but I have better things to do with the next eighty years. I'm sure if MS owned PHP, it would take seconds to find ads for it, plus there would be even more threads in TDWTF devoted to PHP stories. Sorry if you didn't read my previous posts.



    1. What's the matter with $ sign? It allows for some very useful constructs, like $varname='foo'; $$varname = 20; echo $foo; I'm rather new to programming, but I don't see why most people think that using eval() and generally generating bits of code at runtime in interpreted langauges is bad / hackish / ugly / unhealthy / whatever. Sure, it's hard to debug, but so are inline asm functions in C, and yet nobody has objections for them being in every C library that touches any hardware if it's the only method to do it.
    2. It's easy to write WTFs in PHP, but if you know what are you doing, the most criticized features (like very weak typing and not having to explicitly declare variables) are simply convenient.


  • @Tweenk said:

    1. What's the matter with $ sign?

    You mean it's really productive to press shift and then 4 every time you want to reference a variable? And it makes your code look better or what? Why not make the interpreter's job easier by typing # in front of function names for example? It's ridiculous in first place...

    Using interpreted language has other disadvantages and in first place comes that syntactical errors will not be discovered until the actual code is executed. Changing a function's parameters in C++ or ASP.NET will prevent you from compiling the entire project until you fix all the references. In a script language like PHP you will discover that only if you try to open these pages. Yeah it's up to you but the compiler helps a lot.

    Also what about debugging? Can you set a breakpoint in your code and then step through your program in PHP?

     

    @Tweenk said:

    I'm rather new to programming, but I don't see why most people think that using eval() and generally generating bits of code at runtime in interpreted langauges is bad / hackish / ugly / unhealthy / whatever. Sure, it's hard to debug, but so are inline asm functions in C, and yet nobody has objections for them being in every C library that touches any hardware if it's the only method to do it.

    Because just like the goto statement there are usually other ways of doing the same and you should use it as as the last option only. The is an exception that comes to my mind now and it makes sense to use eval -  it's when you are retrieving dynamically code from the server using some AJAX technique so you can execute the scripts.

    Want to argue? Give me one of your eval statements and let's see if this is the only way and if it's as readable and easy as any other option?

     

    @Tweenk said:

    2. It's easy to write WTFs in PHP, but if you know what are you doing, the most criticized features (like very weak typing and not having to explicitly declare variables) are simply convenient.

    It's easy to write WTFs in every language, we see something new every day on this site. To me some of the PHP features are a WTF on their own but it's a matter of personal choice whether to use it or now. Not having to explicitly declare variables isn't a big advantage and being able to assign to a variable once a number and later a string doesn't help you program easier, just makes your code look odd to anyone else and even you (say 5 years later). In C++ you may declare variables everywhere it's not like Pascal where you have to define them before the "begin" or the function/procedure.



  • @Tweenk said:

    but if you know what are you doing

    This is brilliant ... simply brilliant! WTF-like features are always defended by "if you know what you are doing it helps"... no it doesn't and usually there'a a better simpler and much more elegant solution to do the same thing. It's all about maintainability? When you write the code you "know what you are doing" but will everyone else have the slightest clue about that when it comes to supporting this code? Putting 3 lines of comments to explain a line of code doesn't justify it unless you really gain a 1000% performance improvement in a critical block, and weak typing and declaring variables when you reference them for first time isn't helping anything at all, does it?



  • someone said earlier that MS is advertising their code generators in a method that is like giving keys to a monkey.  however you forget that in your case your company actually bought the product from microsoft.  also, just because that one person misused a codegenerator and created bad code, are you saying that MS is bad by creating the code generator that in the hands of a good programmer ccan increase his productivity greatly?  



  • @tster said:

    someone said earlier that MS is advertising their code generators in a method that is like giving keys to a monkey.  however you forget that in your case your company actually bought the product from microsoft.  also, just because that one person misused a codegenerator and created bad code, are you saying that MS is bad by creating the code generator that in the hands of a good programmer ccan increase his productivity greatly?  

    In answer to your question no.

    In response to your assumption, my company did no such thing.


Log in to reply
 

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