• davidagain@lemmy.worldEnglish
        4·
        6 minutes ago

        You’re right, this is just not oop AT ALL.

        For the correct OOP solution, you would need consider whether this can be thought of as a kind of stateless leaf method, and therefore implement it as an abstract (singleton) factory, but on the other hand, if you’re using a context object with the registry pattern, you should probably do this properly with IoC containers. Of course, if your object graph isn’t too complex or entangled, you could always just do constructor injection but you risk manging your unit tests, so I would go cautiously if I were looking in that direction.

          • davidagain@lemmy.worldEnglish
            1·
            7 minutes ago

            What about a factory for the factories! There’s nothing more efficient than a tool making tool making tool.

        • collapse_already@lemmy.mlEnglish
          3·
          2 hours ago

          Shouldn’t there be a call to the boolean comparison microservices server in there somewhere? Also, we should consider the possibility that booleans and their operators could be overloaded to do something else entirely. We might need a server farm to handle all of the boolean comparison service requests.

          • davidagain@lemmy.worldEnglish
            1·
            10 minutes ago

            You’re so right, I didn’t think of that. Maybe I’m not cut out to be a manager in IT.

  • becausechemistry@lemm.eeEnglish
    49·
    1 day ago

    Management: Gee whiz, we really have no idea how to gauge productivity to decide who gets promoted. We could manage. Or, better, we could just have someone write a script that pulls info from git on how many lines of code each person has written.

    Programmers:

    • not_woody_shaw@lemmy.worldEnglish
      6·
      10 hours ago

      That’s not even the worst part. What the fuck does a function named Compare_anything do? Does it return anything? It sounds like nothing but a side effect.

      • BatmanAoD@lemmy.worldEnglish
        2·
        7 hours ago

        The unnecessary and confusing functions are horrible, yes, but I’d still say that the fact that they’re wrong is the “worst” part.

      • idunnololz@lemmy.worldEnglish
        4·
        9 hours ago

        Usually comparison functions are supposed to return an integer and are usually useful for sorting. However this one returns a bool so it’s both useless and terribly named.

  • Grandwolf319@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
    27·
    24 hours ago

    Two wrongs don’t make a right, but sometimes in programming, two bugs can cancel each other out.

    Whoever wrote this is more than capable of using it incorrectly.

  • Acters@lemmy.worldEnglish
    21·
    22 hours ago

    Those are rookie lines of code numbers right there.
    I would have done it without the ==

    internal static bool AreBooleansEqual(bool orig, bool val)
{
    if(orig) 
    {
        if(val)
            return false
        return true
    }
    if(val)
        return true 
    return false
}

    Don’t know why their code returns false when they are equal but I’m not going to dig through old code to refactor to use true instead of false.

    • InFerNo@lemmy.mlEnglish
      5·
      17 hours ago

      Put more curly brackets around your if (val) true statement for 4 more lines, put elses in there for more lines even.

      • Acters@lemmy.worldEnglish
        7·
        14 hours ago

        I should have created a local variable to store the result variable and return after the if statements. I just couldn’t help to make it look partially nice. My brain just doesn’t think at this high caliber of LOC optimizations.

        New optimized LOC version:

        internal static bool AreBooleansEqual(bool orig, bool val)
{
    bool result;
    if(orig) 
    {
        if(val)
        {
            result = false;
        }
        else
        {
            result = true;
        }
    }
    else
    {
        if(val)
        {
            result = true;
        }
        else
        {
            result = false;
        }
    }
    return result;
}

        My previous LOC: 12
        New LOC version: 27

        • servobobo@feddit.nlEnglish
          3·
          8 hours ago

          Surely we could optimize the return value with a switch statement and store the result as an integer to hide the compiler warning about our clearly correct code:

          internal static bool AreBooleansEqual(bool orig, bool val)
{
    int result;
    if(orig) 
    {
        if(val)
        {
            result = 0;
        }
        else
        {
            result = 1;
        }
    }
    else
    {
        if(val)
        {
            result = 1;
        }
        else
        {
            result = 0;
        }
    }
    switch (result)
    {
         case(1):
             return true;
         case(0):
             return false;
         default:
             return AreBooleansEqual(orig, val);
    }
}

          New LOC: 35

          • InFerNo@lemmy.mlEnglish
            2·
            6 hours ago

            Make the input variables nullable, then add checks if the values are null, then assign default values if they are, otherwise continue with the passed values.

      • Acters@lemmy.worldEnglish
        2·
        15 hours ago

        I was debating on bitwise operations, but decided on super basic if statements which I think the compiler would optimize, happy to see the logical operation form too