this post was submitted on 11 Oct 2025
435 points (99.5% liked)

Programmer Humor

26846 readers
610 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
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] CookieOfFortune@lemmy.world 63 points 2 days ago (1 children)

This isn’t sufficiently enterprisey for Java. There should be a Roman numeral factory followed by relevant fromString and toInteger methods.

[–] vithigar@lemmy.ca 13 points 2 days ago

Ugh. Literally refactored multiple factories into straightforward functions in the most recent sprint where I work.

Someone saw a public factory method which was a factory for a reason and just cargo culted multiple private methods using the same pattern.

[–] TheLazyNerd@europe.pub 19 points 2 days ago

Since Roman numerals have an upper bound, the time complexity is always O(1).

[–] theunknownmuncher@lemmy.world 113 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

Whenever you sit back and smile proudly to yourself about how clever the block of code you just wrote is, your next move should be to delete and rewrite it.

This is a clever block of code! Great job, now rewrite it to be sane 😂

[–] balsoft@lemmy.ml 31 points 2 days ago (3 children)

I think it depends; some smart code is good actually, think 0x5f3759df. As long as you properly document it and leave plenty of comments. This one is not smart though, at best it's what I would call witty.

[–] theunknownmuncher@lemmy.world 23 points 2 days ago

I'd accept that "smart code" and "clever code" are 2 different things

[–] Valmond@lemmy.world 12 points 2 days ago

Fast inverse square root eh?

[–] Cethin@lemmy.zip 4 points 2 days ago

This isn't smart. This is clever. It's a way to solve a problem in a novel way. It isn't the best, or even most obvious, way to solve the problem. It's just interesting.

[–] douglasg14b@lemmy.world 66 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Still linear time at least, could always be much MUCH worse

[–] dfyx@lemmy.helios42.de 43 points 2 days ago (2 children)

There could be a hidden quadratic cost because the string needs to be reallocated and copied multiple times.

[–] Jerkface@lemmy.world 41 points 2 days ago (1 children)
[–] aaaaaaaaargh@feddit.org 11 points 2 days ago

This is the spirit

[–] kogasa@programming.dev 5 points 2 days ago

Not quadratic in the length of the input. Assuming replace is linear this is also linear

[–] lugal@lemmy.dbzer0.com 17 points 2 days ago (1 children)

True. Lost opportunity to blow things up with useless recursivity

[–] bleistift2@sopuli.xyz 17 points 2 days ago (2 children)

The word you’re looking for is recursion (see recursion).

[–] lugal@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 2 days ago

Thanks. I knew something was off

[–] Gonzako@lemmy.world 6 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Nah, I'd like to un-see recursion. It was way overblown on uni, I barely ever use it.

[–] Cethin@lemmy.zip 10 points 2 days ago (3 children)

Recursion is amazing for a small selection of problems. Most of the time you don't need, or want, it. When it is useful though, it tends to be really useful.

I don't understand people's issue with it. I always found it easy. Maybe that's why I feel this way. Maybe if you find it challenging you want to avoid it, even when it's a good solution.

[–] Ephera@lemmy.ml 4 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I think, their point (and also my experience) is that you get taught about it in university a lot more than about simple loops, so it feels more important even though you rarely use it in reality.

Same thing goes for linked lists and inheritance...

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] kamstrup@programming.dev 3 points 2 days ago

Most devs I know like recursion. Trouble is that many popular languages don't support tail recursion, but throw a stackoverflow error after a few thousand levels. So you have to keep track of max recursion depth manually, and it starts to look like a complicated solution

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Wynnstan@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago

Alternatively pip install roman.

[–] olafurp@lemmy.world 9 points 2 days ago (1 children)

It's not too bad, it's readable and easily optimised by adding intermediate sums and removing whatever power of 10 you're working on.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] anugeshtu@lemmy.world 39 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Why don't you just ask Chat-GPT o3 every time? Works like a charm!

[–] lugal@lemmy.dbzer0.com 47 points 2 days ago

Because there are better random generators

[–] TootSweet@lemmy.world 31 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

My first thought was something along the lines of a "zip bomb". For every "M" in the input string, it'd use more than a KiB of memory. But still, it'd take a string of millions of "M"s to exhaust memory on even a low-end modern server. Still probably not a good idea to expose to untrusted input on a public networked server, though. And it could easily peg a CPU core for a good while. Very good leveraged target for DDOSing.

[–] rooroo@feddit.org 22 points 2 days ago (13 children)

It also works the other way round: wanna convert Arabic n to Roman? Just write n times ‘I’ and revert these replacement in inverse order.

load more comments (13 replies)
[–] Zangoose@lemmy.world 14 points 2 days ago (1 children)

They forgot "CM" so this doesn't work for any number that ends in 900s

[–] trxxruraxvr@lemmy.world 49 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

No, M will be replaced by DD and then CD will be picked up, so it will go

  1. CM
  2. CDD
  3. CCCCD
  4. CCCCCCCCC
  5. ......
[–] mkwt@lemmy.world 3 points 2 days ago (1 children)

You missed "CM," which was common in copyright statements in the 20th century.

[–] webadict@lemmy.world 9 points 1 day ago

No, they didn't.

CM becomes CDD, which becomes CCCCD which becomes CCCCCCCCC.

[–] Zyansheep@programming.dev 3 points 2 days ago
load more comments
view more: next ›