Query Inception: When Your Query Is So Query It Queries Itself

That thousand-yard stare when your frontend is pixel-perfect, your backend logic is flawless, but someone decided to store player names as "FIRSTNAME SECONDNAME" in the database. Eight years of development experience and I'm still getting called at 2 AM because production data looks like a placeholder that escaped into the wild. Classic "works on my machine" until the real data hits and suddenly you're explaining to management why the soccer player's actual name isn't showing up during the European Qualifiers broadcast.

SWEET MOTHER OF LEGACY CODE! 😱 A Gordon Ramsay-style tech show would be the MOST SAVAGE THING EVER! Imagine him discovering your company is running Ubuntu 8.04 (released in 2008 and LONG dead) with not one but TWO backdoors AND a crypto miner stealing your electricity! That's like finding expired ingredients from the last decade AND rats in the kitchen! And owing $2 MILLION to AWS?! That's not technical debt, that's technical BANKRUPTCY! The cloud bill alone would make Gordon's veins pop out of his forehead while he screams "THIS INFRASTRUCTURE IS SO OLD IT REMEMBERS WHEN JAVASCRIPT WAS COOL THE FIRST TIME!"

Content Is Your Child Texting About Programming Languages? What your C obsessed teen's texts actually mean omg - one more generic wtf - wheres the function fml - for my loop idfe indentation doesn't feel correct lol - logic on loop aka - abhorrent kafkaesque arithmetic rofl . right-oriented frame layout imo - iteration may overload stfu - statically typed feels unwise brb - bad recursion brb

Ah yes, the classic "let's sacrifice security on the altar of optimization." This database hero just casually suggested storing all passwords in a single table with foreign keys because "users reuse passwords anyway" – reducing storage from 100GB to 3GB. What a brilliant idea! Next up: storing all user data in a public GitHub repo to save on AWS costs. Security experts aren't having panic attacks right now, they're just doing synchronized fainting as an office team-building exercise.

25 million lines of C code held together by duct tape, prayers, and the tears of generations of developers. This Oracle DB saga reads like a horror story that Stephen King would reject for being too disturbing. The lifecycle of fixing a bug is pure corporate torture: two weeks deciphering mysterious flags, adding more flags to fix the first flags, waiting days for tests to fail, rinse and repeat until you accidentally stumble upon the magical combination that works. The real punchline? After surviving this nightmare and swearing "never again," some poor soul is still maintaining this codebase right now, wondering which of their life choices led them to debugging flag #10,372.

Content Ijust wanted to add to this discussion that I am just compiling on VS and GCC, and used to use include guards. I have now switched to pragma once, and the only reason for me is not 199 performance or portability or standard as I don't really care what is standard as long as VS and GCC support it, and that is that: pragma once reduces possibilities for bugs. It is all too easy to copy and paste a header file to another header file, modify it to suit ones needs, and forget to change the name of the include guard. Once both are included, it takes you a while to track down the error, as the error messages arent necessarily clear. Share Follow edited Nov 30, 2014 at 9:57 answered Jul 22, 2011 at 16:55 Cookie 11.7k 13 52 81 5 This is the correct reason. Forget performance--we should use pragma once because it's less error prone. It occurs to me that if compilers are already tracking include guards, they're already doing most of the work necessary to issue warnings when they see different files using the same macro name. - rieux Jun 13, 2019 at 6:36 Add a comment pragma once has unfixable bugs. It should never be used. 169 If your include search path is sufficiently complicated, the compiler may be unable to tell the difference between two headers with the same basename (e.g. afoo.h and bfoo.h), so a pragma once in one of them will suppress both. It may also be unable to tell that two different relative includes (e.g. include "foo.h" and include "..afoo.h" refer to the same file, so pragma once will fail to suppress a redundant include when it should have. lanc arca attocic tho commorc amia