this post was submitted on 14 Sep 2025
706 points (98.9% liked)

Programmer Humor

26332 readers
1716 users here now

Welcome to Programmer Humor!

This is a place where you can post jokes, memes, humor, etc. related to programming!

For sharing awful code theres also Programming Horror.

Rules

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Probius@sopuli.xyz 8 points 8 hours ago (3 children)

I've had times where I was going through my code and the docs code step by step to see where they logically differed and found that I was doing all the same things, but my code didn't work and copy-pasting their code did. Make it make sense!

[–] aaaa@piefed.world 9 points 6 hours ago

Let me count the ways it has been for me... Capitalization, using -, not using -, wrong quotes, mismatched quotes, no quotes, reading the command the same wrong way about five times and typing it that way. Well this could take forever to list them all.

I just copy paste first now. That way I learn none of the commands or syntax at all

[–] raspberriesareyummy@lemmy.world 4 points 7 hours ago

Been there, found undefined behavior where there should not be any. Imagine a function that takes a bool param with the following code, but neither branch gets executed:

if (b)
   doStuffForTrue();
if (!b)
   doStuffForFalse();

In a function that is passed an uninitialized bool parameter, in gcc compiler, both branches can get executed even when b is const. Reason: uninitialized bool in gcc can have values of a random integer, and while if(b) {} else ({} is guaranteed to execute only one branch, bool evaluations of a bool value take a "shortcut" that only has defined behavior with an initialized bool.

Same code with an uninitialized integer works as expected, btw.

[–] RampantParanoia2365@lemmy.world 4 points 8 hours ago

I find myself saying this about 35 times a day, at nearly every turn, with about everything I interact with.