Bug Amnesia

The glorious fall of programmer dignity, visualized in perfect clarity. Once upon a time, developers were digital demigods who wrote code without AI crutches, built entire games in Assembly (because apparently suffering builds character), crafted code that literally sent humans to the moon, and performed memory management wizardry by hand. Fast forward to today's pathetic reality: developers frantically Googling how to center a div (still an unsolved mystery of computer science), begging ChatGPT to fix basic syntax errors, getting permanently trapped in Vim like it's some kind of developer Hotel California, and introducing three new bugs while fixing one—a net negative contribution to humanity. The evolution from muscle-bound coding titans to helpless brain-worms perfectly captures how we've traded actual knowledge for dependency on tools. Progress!

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

Imagine inheriting a dumpster fire of AI-generated spaghetti code, and someone thinks you can fix everything from authentication to CI/CD with the budget that wouldn't even cover your therapy sessions after seeing the codebase. That $2,500 budget is the real joke here. That's not even enough for the coffee you'll need to stay awake while deciphering what the hell the AI was thinking when it generated this monstrosity. This is the modern tech equivalent of "I need you to rebuild the Titanic using only duct tape and a tight deadline. Oh, and can you make it unsinkable this time?"

Ah, the final boss of debugging: turning off your music. The meme shows Rodin's "The Thinker" statue - the universal symbol for "my brain is now operating at 100% CPU utilization." That moment when your algorithm is so complex that even your favorite playlist becomes cognitive overhead. You've entered the zone where it's just you, the problem, and the existential crisis of wondering if you should've become a farmer instead. The silence is deafening, the concentration is monumental, and yet the solution remains stubbornly elusive. Your brain has essentially become a single-threaded application with no garbage collection.

Content MONKS TRYING TO BE CELIBATE DEVS DEVS Look what they need to mimic a fraction of our power

Content yuva.krishna.memes Two men, who exploited a bug in casino video poker machines and won nearly half a million dollars, were charged with hacking, computer fraud, and wire fraud. However, their lawyer argued that the men simply pushed a sequence of buttons that they were legally allowed to. The case was dismissed. The programmer and QA who worked on that feature: