I, too, place 2> /dev/null after every line
this post was submitted on 17 Jan 2025
734 points (98.9% liked)
Programmer Humor
20033 readers
390 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
- Keep content in english
- No advertisements
- Posts must be related to programming or programmer topics
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Yes, but 2>&1 > /dev/null is the real hero.
No, > /dev/null 2>&1 is. If try your example but with file instead null, stderr content not in file.
Because x>y not redirect x to y, but duplicate y and set x to y-duplicate. See bash manpage REDIRECTION (your example in that section for what not work).
As i understand, your example set 2 to what 1 is, then set 1 to null. Now 2 not null, but what 1 before.
So, the joke is that it should hide all output.
Yes it do, your example do too. But if test thing and replace null with file, suddenly stderr missing. Happen to me, 5h debug session. Hope to help prevent that for other people.
If it wanted to get my attention it should have been an error
if (error) {
continue;
}
try {
operation();
} catch {
// nice weather, eh?
}
Starting with Java 21 (I think), they've introduced ignored variables, so you can now actually do this:
try {
operation();
} catch (Exception _) {
// nice weather, eh?
}
Edit: forgot that this is about JS lel
So basically the same as a discard in C#?
Yeah, Python has it as well. I think the only real use of it is code readability since you declare that this variable will never be used.
Same thing right?
If your joking yes, if your not Java and Java Script are seperate things.
His joking?
Actually made this mistake in front of 20 people the other day. Guy at my job mentioned coding in java and I asked if he was doing web dev 🤦
Plenty of java back end web development, so maybe not as embarrassing as you felt?
He said "I've been closing in C# and Java for 2 years" and I asked, in front of everyone, "are you doing web dev?" And he just coldly said no
See this could have been fine if I didn't double down and go "then what are you using java for... OH WAIT"
☑️ PR Approved
with contextlib.suppress(BaseException):
do_thing()Thanks. I hate it.
On Error Resume Next
Visual Basic is a beautiful language
I legitimately use this line in one of my scripts because range.find returns an error of the value is not found. The use case is taking a 2d matrix saved as an array, with data collected from multiple excel tabs and rearranging it for a CSV upload into Salesforce. The initial array contains values that the rest of the data does not have, so when I search for a non existent value, I can skip the error.
Of course vba COULD just implement try/catch statements and that'd be so much cleaner, but alas.
On error goto 0
Was always syntacticly confusing for me.
Eh it's Javascript. Anything goes
Yeah, array.length is mutable in javascript. I'm surprised it caught on.
If i can just suppress the warnings which need to be fixed till morning in my buggy code, anything goes!
If I can't see it, is it really there?
edit: works better when used together with StackOverflow.comment.enabled = false;
Actually fixing warnings is for noobs
if they mattered they'd be errors I'm sure
That's when you do CTRL+C, CTRL+V
Warnings are for ignorings :3
If it works, it works
I would add: until it doesn't.
This is why:
"It ain't stupid if it works."
is fundamentally incorrect.
Sometimes it’s better to hope while closing eyes
Warnings? We’ll come back and address those later. Maybe once we’re feature complete. Or maybe shortly after that.
Don't worry. We'll totally fix all of them soon. Promise. Hand to God. They definitely will not be here five years from now.
Meanwhile in another universe one of my biggest win was to introduce this line in our PR validation pipeline.
eslint . --max-warnings 0
Works so well, and soothes the warning annoyance brain, and keeps warnings from eventually becoming errors.
In a codebase with a lot of warnings is even better for me to add a disable comments for all the existing warning and then not allow any new one in.
And then each time a part of the code needs to be touched the existing warning there should be solved too.
Several times I've set the max warnings to whatever the current warning count is, and then decreased that over time.
I don't get it. This isn't funny. I wouldn't approve it in merge request. Most wouldn't.
Trying to hide problems and incompetence is the joke. A lot of people don't want problems solved, they just don't want to see them, and will take the easy route. If you just want that, this is the easy route.
Incompetent? Absolutely, that's the joke.
-ErrorActionPreference SilentlyContinue
--yolo