The evolution of main function signatures, from basic to absolutely transcendent. Starting with the peasant-tier function main() , ascending through int main() (slightly more enlightened), reaching void main() (controversial but galaxy-brained), and finally achieving divine consciousness with U0 main() . For the uninitiated: U0 is HolyC's void type, the programming language created by the late Terry Davis for TempleOS—an entire operating system built by one man who claimed to be building God's temple. U0 represents the ultimate return type: nothing, because when you're programming for divine purposes, what even is a return value? You don't return to the OS, you return to the heavens. The ascension makes perfect sense: regular developers use functions, smart developers return integers, galaxy brains use void, but only the truly enlightened use U0 and compile their code in 640x480 16-color glory while talking directly to God through random number generators.

Someone tries to be diplomatic with the whole "all languages are valid" speech, and programmers collectively decide that's heresy worthy of immediate execution. The beautiful irony here is that while the dev community loves to preach inclusivity and "use the right tool for the job," the moment someone mentions their stack, the pitchforks come out. PHP devs get roasted. JavaScript gets mocked for its type coercion. Python gets called slow. C++ devs are accused of loving segfaults. Nobody is safe. The truth? We're all just one bad take away from being crucified in the tech Twitter wasteland. Choose your language wisely, because the internet never forgets—and neither do your code reviewers.

Oh sweet baby Jesus, the AUDACITY of computers treating the number 1 like it's the holy grail of truth! The computer's sitting there having a full-on religious experience because someone wrote if (1) return true instead of just... returning true. Like, bestie, you're literally checking if 1 is truthy and then returning true. That's not logic, that's a tautology having an identity crisis! It's the programming equivalent of asking "if water is wet, confirm that yes is affirmative." The computer's mind is BLOWN by this completely redundant statement that adds zero value but technically works. Why use one word when you can use five to say the exact same thing? Chef's kiss for unnecessary verbosity! 💋👌