top 99 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 1 point 1 year ago
[–] 137 points 1 year ago (1 child)

Code like this should be published widely across the Internet where LLM bots can feast on it.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 111 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    ftfy

    bool IsEven(int number) {
      return !IsOdd(number);
    }
    
    bool IsOdd(int number) {
      return !IsEven(number);
    }
    
  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 15 points 1 year ago* (2 children)

    You kid, but Idris2 documentation literally proposes almost this exact impl: https://idris2.readthedocs.io/en/latest/tutorial/typesfuns.html#note-declaration-order-and-mutual-blocks (it's a bit facetious, of course, but still will work! the actual impl in the language is a lot more boring: https://github.com/idris-lang/Idris2/blob/main/libs/base/Data/Integral.idr)

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    I hadn't seen Idris2. Thank you for providing me with a new rabbit hole!

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago

    I'm glad to tell more people about it. It's really quite amazing (I could write a somewhat complex algorithm and prove some properties about it in a couple afternoons, despite limited formal verification experience) and I'm sure that in 20 odd years the ideas behind it will make it into mainstream languages, just as with ML/Haskell.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 89 points 1 year ago* (5 children)
    else print("number not supported");
    
  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] [S] 7 points 1 year ago* (4 children)

    As we're posting examples I'll add how lovely it is in Elixir. Elixir def not putting the fun in programmer memes do. One reason I picked it because I can't be trusted to not be the meme.

    def is_even?(n) do
      rem(n, 2) == 0
    end
    
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 1 year ago* (3 children)

    I mean, it would be almost this exact thing in almost any language.

    fn is_even(n: i64) -> bool {
        n % 2 == 0
    }
    
    even n = n `rem` 2 == 0
    
    def is_even(n):
        return n % 2 == 0
    

    etc

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Personal preference, but elixir just strikes a balance that doesn’t make me feel like I’m reading hieroglyphs so I’m actually happy to see it praised.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago

    I would have preferred for the function to be called mod, since it's the modulo operation, which in math is represented with a percentage or "mod". Most programming languages use a percentage because of that, so do a lot of calculators.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago

    Yeah, I agree that Elixir is a fine language for some tasks. I personally find the readability somewhat average, but it's very maintainable (due to how it enables clear program structure), the error handling is great, and the lightweight process system is amazing.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 44 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    This is why this code is good. Opens MS paint. When I worked at Blizzard-

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 43 points 1 year ago

    No, no, you should group the return false lines together 😤😤

    if (number == 1) return false;
    else if (number == 3) return false;
    else if (number == 5) return false;
    //...
    else if (number == 2) return true;
    else if (number == 4) return true;
    //...
    
  • source
  • [–] 33 points 1 year ago (12 children)

    I'm partial to a recursive solution. Lol

    def is_even(number):
        if number < 0 or (number%1) > 0:
            raise ValueError("This impl requires positive integers only") 
        if number < 2:
            return number
        return is_even(number - 2)
    
  • source
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] 19 points 1 year ago* (11 children)

    I prefer good ole regex test of a binary num

    function isEven(number){
       binary=$(echo "obase=2; $number" | bc)
       if [ "${binary:-1}" = "1" ]; then
             return 255
       fi
       return 0
    }
    
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 1 year ago* (7 children)

    Amateur! I can read and understand that almost right away. Now I present a better solution:

    even() ((($1+1)&1))
    

    (I mean, it's funny cause it's unreadable, but I suspect this is also one of the most efficient bash implementations possible)

    (Actually the obvious one is a slight bit faster. But this impl for odd is the fastest one as far as I can tell odd() (($1&1)))

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    woah your bash is legit good. I thought numeric pretexts needed $(( blah )), but you're ommiting the $ like an absolute madman. How is this wizardy possible

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    See: man bash, "Compound Commands" and "Shell Function Definitions"

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Oh I see it, but for some reason I was taught to always use $(( arith )) instead of (( arith )) and I guess I'm just wondering what the difference is

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 child)

    The difference is that (( is a "compound command", similar to [[ (evaluate conditional expression), while $(( )) is "aritmetic expansion". They behave in almost exactly the same way but are used in different contexts - the former uses "exit codes" while the latter returns a string, so the former would be used where you would expect a command, while the latter would be used where you expect an expression. A function definition expects a compound command, so that's what we use. If we used $(( )) directly, it wouldn't parse:

    $ even() $((($1+1)&1))
    bash: syntax error near unexpected token `$((($1+1)&1))'
    

    We would have to do something like

    even() { return $(($1&1)); }
    

    (notice how this is inverted from the (( case - (( actually inverts 0 -> exit code 1 and any other result to exit code 0, so that it matches bash semantics of exit code 0 being "true" and any other exit code being "false" when used in a conditional)

    But this is a bit easier to understand and as such wouldn't cut it, as any seasoned bash expert will tell you. Can't be irreplaceable if anyone on your team can read your code, right?

    I can't think of many use-cases for ((. I guess if you wanted to do some arithmetic in a conditional?

    if (( $1&1 )); then echo "odd!"; else echo "even!"; fi
    

    But this is pretty contrived. This is probably the reason you've never heard of it.

    This (( vs. $(( )) thing is similar to how there is ( compound command (run in a subshell), and $( ) (command substitution). You can actually use the former to define a function too (as it's a compound command):

    real_exit() { exit 1; }
    fake_exit() ( exit 1 )
    

    Calling real_exit will exit from the shell, while calling fake_exit will do nothing as the exit 1 command is executed in a separate subshell. Notice how you can also do the same in a command substition (because it runs in a subshell too):

    echo $(echo foo; exit 1)
    

    Will run successfully and output foo.

    (( being paired with $((, and ( with $(, is mostly just a syntactic rhyme rather than anything consistent. E.g. { and ${ do very different things, and $[[ just doesn't exist.

    Bash is awful. It's funny but also sad that we're stuck with it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [–] 59 points 1 year ago (9 children)

    YanDev: "Thank God I'm no longer the most hated indie dev!"

  • source
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [+] -8 points 1 year ago (8 children)

    YanDev is a literal pedophile. It's honestly mind boggling people care more about a guy who won't sign a petition on preserving video games than pedophiles and bigots. I don't get the hate.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 14 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    it's not that he "wont sign it". lmao. its that he comoketely unprovoked started a hate campaign against it, literally on the spot hearing about it on stream, directed his viewers not to engage with the petition and started making up a bunch of reasons while talking in that confident-but-clulesss voice about how its destructive and awful and short sighted, making up a bunch of atuff about it that was immediately disproven, just spewing all this vitriol for no reason. Not engaging with it is one thing but actively fighting against a wonderul consumer rights campaign like this, not to mention how important iy is to gaming history to be able to preserve games, is so anti-gamer i dont understand how he ever got a following. Hes a dipsh who talks out of his butthole and he appeals to the kind of lobenly nerd that thinks being an asshole is cool

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Don't forget he threw all his LGBT fans under the bus so he could have a nice buddy buddy with asmongold. Resulting in his community being invested with asmongold's hateful degen followers, calling his LGBT fans horrific slurs.

    But hey! Atleast he was able to defend the game Ashes of Creation or whatever its called against asmonshit...

    Then when fans called him out, he went "Just cancel me, i guess..." fucking manchild...

    Random website but just for a article that gives a summary of what happened: https://www.sportskeeda.com/us/streamers/news-i-again-pirate-software-defends-collaboration-asmongold-amid-backlash-fans

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 38 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    Because this dumbass has existed for a lot longer than the single moment you are using to construct the strawman of "the enraged internet user over nothing other than a 'petition' (HUGE mischaracterization, he's not eligible to sign in anyway)" and just like when yanderedev was finally widely controversial, the "yanderedev code is bad lol" memes and jokes were very popular.

    Can you at least pretend you understand how "the continuous flow of time works" before you post the dumbest shit ever?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [+] -26 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Even this comment is filled with hatred. Why are you so angry?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 22 points 1 year ago (2 children)
    def even(n: int) -> bool:
        code = ""
        for i in range(0, n+1, 2):
            code += f"if {n} == {i}:\n out = True\n"
            j = i+1
            code += f"if {n} == {j}:\n out = False\n"
        local_vars = {}
        exec(code, {}, local_vars)
        return local_vars["out"]
    

    scalable version

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 21 points 1 year ago

    A decent compiler will optimize this into return maybe;

  • source
  • [–] 19 points 1 year ago

    Plot twist: they used a script to generate that code.

  • source
  • [–] 19 points 1 year ago* (2 children)
    def is_even(num):
        if num == 1:
            return False
        if num == 2:
            return True
        raise ValueError(f'Value of {num} out of range. Literally impossible to tell if it is even.')
    
  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 19 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    This is YandereDev levels of bad.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 16 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    You don't get it, it runs on a smart fridge so there's no reason to change it

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 15 points 1 year ago

    Y'all laugh but this man has amazing code coverage numbers.

  • source
  • [–] 13 points 1 year ago* (1 child)

    I'll join in

    const isEven = (n) 
      => !["1","3","5","7","9"]
        .includes(Math.round(n).toString().slice(-1)) 
    
  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 43 points 1 year ago* (8 children)

    That code is so wrong. We're talking about Jason "Thor" Hall here—that function should be returning 1 and 0, not booleans.

    If you don't get the joke...In the source code for his GameMaker game, he never uses true or false. It's always comparing a number equal to 1.

  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago (7 children)

    Frankly, it's what I did, too, after coming out of Uni-level C.

    My code was goddamn unreadable.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 1 year ago* (1 child)

    It's the same for a lot of people. Beginners are still learning good practices for maintainable code, and they're expected to get better over time.

    The reason people are ragging on PirateSoftware/Jason/Thor isn't because he's bad at writing code. It's because he's bad at writing code, proclaiming to be an experienced game development veteran, and doubling down and making excuses whenever people point out where his code could be better.

    Nobody would have cared if he admitted that he has some areas for improvement, but he seemingly has to flaunt his overstated qualifications and act like the be-all, end-all, know-it-all of video game development. I'm more invested in watching the drama unfold than I should be, but it's hard not to appreciate the schadenfreude from watching arrogant influencers destroy their reputation.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago

    He's totally one of those people that's sort of attractive and has an authoritative voice so s lot of people have probably folded to him in arguments through his life. I don't like making generalizations like that about people but this isn't the first time he's acted like this. The one that really took the cake was the whole hardcore WoW raid debacle.

    The TL;DR is, as well as not trying to really spend time on the parts that don't matter, he did some things that may or may not have been the right thing to do in the situation depending on your perspective. But whenever any of his guild mates or other viewers would criticize him he'd be so adamant that no, he didn't do anything wrong, he did exactly what he was supposed to do, etc. People would even explicitly tell him "hey, what's pissing us off now isn't that you did it, it's that you're so adamant you couldn't have possibly made a mistake, you're not willing to see our perspective. You're not willing to admit that maybe you could've been wrong. You're not willing to apologize." And still, his reaction to this was to triple down and just insist he didn't do anything wrong.

    Like I literally even saw a clip of him talking to someone and he said "a lot of people think I'm being condescending when really I'm just providing context." And the guy talking to him points out "yeah, it's a problem that you think anyone disagreeing with you doesn't understand the situation, it's like you think they're stupid." It's like it short circuited his brain. It's like he'd never considered it.

    So yeah, I have a pretty low opinion of him. But I also recognize that maybe all these clips are taken out of context, who knows. It's not like my opinion really matters. I don't work with him or know him. I don't care about streamers. I don't really watch them.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    I am working with C in embedded designs and I still use 1 or 0 for a bool certain situations, mostly lines level.

    For whatever pea-brained reason, it feels yucky to me to set a gpio to true/false instead of a 1/0.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago* (3 children)

    GPIOs are usually controlled by a single bit of a register anyway. Most likely you need to do something like:

    // Set high
    PORTB |= 1 << PINB5;
    // Set low
    PORTB &= ~(1 << PINB5);
    
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    I am a lazy dev (not really, clients always want fast code), so I use the provided HAL libraries 99.9% of the time.

    But I have seen code where someone would write something like

    gpio_write(PIN_X, true) 
    

    and it always stood out to me.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (1 child)

    Define on as true or something? Or maybe that's more confusing. I'm not a C dev so I'm not gonna pretend to understand idiomatic microcontroller code lol.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 9 points 1 year ago

    Can you imagine being a TA and having to grade somebody's hw and you get this first thing? lmao

  • source
  • [–] 8 points 1 year ago (2 children)
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago

    Good if you are rated by an AI that pays for LOCs.

  • source
  • [–] 11 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    This code would run a lot faster as a hash table look up.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago

    Oh shit, gotta check the negative numbers as well!

  • source
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago (6 children)

    You could use a loop to subtract 2 from the number until it equals one or zero

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago* (5 children)

    Or literally just look at its binary representation. If the least significant digit is a "1", it's odd, if "0", it's even. Or you can divide by 2 and check for a remainder.

    Your method is just spending time grinding away CPU cycles for no reason.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 17 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Sorry we're not all fucking math nerds like you who knows words like "significant" or "binary" or "divide", Poindexter. Some of us make do with whatever solution is available!

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (1 child)

    We know you were being satire. IMO it is of decent manner if you add "/s" to be explicit so when responding a serious reply, because this is not a satire comment chain.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 16 points 1 year ago (10 children)

    This is what Test Driven Development looks like

  • source
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 13 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    TDD has cycles of red, green, refactor. This has neither been refactored nor tested. You can tell by the duplication and the fact that it can't pass all test cases.

    If this looks like TDD to you, I'm sorry that is your experience. Good results with TDD are not guaranteed, you still have to be a strong developer and think through the solution.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    As the existing reply stated, there are only ever finitely many tests.

    My issue with TDD is that it pretends to drive the final implementation with tests, but what is really driving the implementation is the monkey at the keyboard thinking, "testing for evenness should be done with the modulo operation," not exhaustive tests.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (3 children)

    The monkey at the keyboard thinking is what software development is. When faced with a failing test, you make it pass as simply as possible, and then you summon all your computer science / programming experience to refactor the code into something more elegant and maintainable.

    In this case that is using math to check if the input is divisible by two without a remainder. If you don't know how that works, you're going to have a bad time, like the picture in this post.

    TDD doesn't promise to drive the final implementation at the unit level, but it does document how the class under test behaves and how to use it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    When faced with a failing test, you make it pass as simply as possible, and then you summon all your computer science / programming experience to refactor the code into something more elegant and maintainable.

    Why bother making it pass "as simply as possible" instead of summoning all that experience to write something that don't know is stupid?

    TDD doesn’t promise to drive the final implementation at the unit level

    What exactly does it drive, then? Apart from writing more test code than application code, with attendant burdens when refactoring or making other changes.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (1 child)

    The rhythm of TDD is to first write a failing test. That starts driving the design of your production code. To do that you need to invoke a function/method with arguments that responds with an expected answer.

    At that point you've started naming things, designing the interface of the unit being tested, and you've provided at least one example.

    Let's say you need a method like isEven(int number): Boolean. I'd start with asserting 2 is even in my first test case.

    To pass that, I can jump to number % 2 == 0. Or, I can just return true. Either way gets me to a passing test, but I prefer the latter because it enables me to write another failing test.

    Now I am forced to write a test for odd input, so I assert 3 is not even. This test fails, because it currently just returns true. Now I must implement a solution that handles even and odd inputs correctly; I know modulus is the answer, so I use it now. Now both tests pass.

    Then I think about other interesting cases: 0, negative ints, integer max/min, etc. I write tests for each of them, the modulus operator holds up. Great. Any refactoring to do? Nope. It's a one-liner.

    The whole process for this function would only add a few minutes of development, since the implementation is trivial. The test runtime should take milliseconds or less, and now there is documentation for the next developer that comes along. They can see what I considered (and what I didn't), and how to use it.

    Tests should make changing your system easier and safer, if they don't it is typically a sign things are being tested at the wrong level. That's outside the scope of this lemmy interaction.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago

    Either way gets me to a passing test, but I prefer the latter because it enables me to write another failing test.

    But you could just write that failing test up front. TDD encourages you to pretend to know less than you do (you know that testing evenness requires more than one test, and you know the implementation requires more than some if-statements), but no-one has ever made a convincing argument to me that you get anything out of this pretence.

    Tests should make changing your system easier and safer, if they don’t it is typically a sign things are being tested at the wrong level

    TDD is about writing (a lot of) unit tests, which are at a low-level. Because they are a low-level design-tool, they test the low-level design. Any non-trivial change affects the low-level design of a component, because changes tend to affect code at a certain level and most of those below it to some degree.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

    Unittest in Python, enjoy! If you pass it with a function like the one in OPs picture, you have earned it.

    import unittest
    import random
    
    class TestOddEven(unittest.TestCase):
        def test_is_odd(self):
            for _ in range(100):
                num = random.randint(-2**63, 2**63 - 1)
    
                odd_num = num | 1
                even_num = num >> 1 << 1
    
                self.assertTrue(is_odd(odd_num))
                self.assertFalse(is_odd(even_num))
    
        def test_is_even(self):
            for _ in range(100):
                num = random.randint(-2**63, 2**63 - 1)
    
                odd_num = num | 1
                even_num = num >> 1 << 1
    
                self.assertTrue(is_even(even_num))
                self.assertFalse(is_even(odd_num))
    
    if __name__ == '__main__':
        unittest.main()
    
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    I don't want unseeded randomness in my tests, ever.

    Seed the tests, and making these pass would be trivial.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    I hope that the language's ints are at most 32 bits. For 8 bits it could even be written by hand & the source code for a 32 bit version would only take up avg_line_len * 4GiB space for the source code of the function. But it might take a bit of time to compile a version that supports the full range of 64 or 128 bit ints.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago

    that's some good code right there

  • source
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago

    When did Thor become the dev for Yandere Simulator?

  • source
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago

    I am more amazed that he didn't stop at 10 and think "damn this is tiresome isn't there a one liner i could do?". I want to know how far he went. His stubbornness is amazing but also scary. I haven't seen this kind of code since back in school lol lol lol

  • source
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago

    no unit tests huh.

    /s

  • source
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago

    Yeah but did you know he worked for Blizzard tho

  • source
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›
    41 comments in c/programmer_humor@programming.dev view that post