the eye-opener commit

Content LEVELS OF SATISFACTION NEW PROJECT FIXING A BUG DELETING CODE RESOLUTION: NOT A BUG MONKEYUSER.COM ProarammerHumor.io

The classic "IT person as unappreciated hero" syndrome strikes again! When you've spent years battling printers that randomly decide to speak in tongues, servers that choose 3 PM on Friday to have existential crises, and users who think "have you tried turning it off and on again" is revolutionary advice... you start to feel like a grizzled detective in a tech noir film. The badge and gun? Those were earned in the trenches of weekend deployments and emergency patches. The real question is why management always looks surprised when IT folks display the thousand-yard stare of someone who's seen too many "unexpected error" messages.

Content I FIXED THE ISSUE USING A TEMP SOLUTION YOU'LL WORK ON A PERMANENT ONE NOW, RIGHT? YOU'LL WORK ON A PERMANENT ONE NOW, RIGHT?

Content What we say What we mean Horrible hack Horrible hack that I didn't write Temporary workaround Horrible hack that I wrote It's broken There are bugs in your code It has a few issues There are bugs in my code Obscure Someone else's code doesn't have comments Self-documenting My code doesn't have comments That's why it's an awesome language It's my favorite language and it's really easy to do something in it. You're thinking in the wrong mindset It's my favorite language and it's really hard to do something in it. I can read this Perl script I wrote this Perl script I can't read this Perl script I didn't write this Perl script Bad structure Someone else's code is badly organized Complex structure My code is badly organized Bug The absence of a feature I like Out of scope The absence of a feature I don't like Clean solution It works and I understand it We need to rewrite it It works but I don't understand it emacs is better than vi it's too peaceful here, let's start a flame war vi is better than emacs It's too peaceful here, let's start a flame war IMHO You are wrong Legacy code It works, but no one knows how XCquitVESCESCC I don't know how to quit vi

The first part of this authentication function is actually doing its job—checking if the password matches. But then comes the security masterpiece: if (true == true) . Congratulations, you've created the digital equivalent of a bouncer who checks your ID and then lets you in anyway because "yep, gravity still works!" This function will authenticate literally anyone who gets past the first check... or fails it and just keeps trying. Security experts hate this one weird trick!

When game engine limitations meet developer ingenuity! In Fallout 3, the devs couldn't implement rideable trains due to engine constraints, so they created an NPC with a train-shaped hat who walks underground. Players think they're riding a train, but they're actually just wearing a dude like a hat who's shuffling below the surface. This is basically the digital equivalent of two kids in a trenchcoat pretending to be an adult, except it's a human pretending to be a train. Classic game dev hack that shows sometimes the most elegant solution is the most ridiculous one.