sorting Memes

SQL Time Is Always Wrong Time
Databases Programming Debugging
15 days ago 172.9K views 0 shares
SQL Time Is Always Wrong Time
What happens when a DBA designs a clock? You get Roman numerals in completely random order because SQL queries without proper constraints do whatever they want. Notice how IX (9) is where 4 should be, and V (5) is at 6 o'clock. The comment "It Will Work This Time" is the eternal lie every developer tells themselves before running untested SQL in production. Spoiler: it never does.

Clock But It's SELECT DIGITS FROM NUMBERS ORDER BY DIGIT NAME DESC
Databases Programming
17 days ago 101.5K views 0 shares
Clock But It's SELECT DIGITS FROM NUMBERS ORDER BY DIGIT NAME DESC
OH. MY. GOD. This is what happens when you let a database admin design a clock! The numbers are in complete chaos because some SQL-obsessed maniac decided to ORDER BY DIGIT NAME DESC instead of, you know, ACTUAL NUMERICAL ORDER like a SANE HUMAN BEING! The SQL query literally sorted the digits by their spelled-out names in descending order, so "twelve" comes before "three" which comes before "ten" and so on. Can you imagine trying to tell time on this monstrosity?! It's like asking what time it is and getting back "SELECT CURRENT_TIME FROM REALITY WHERE SANITY = NULL"!

Technically Horrifyingly Correct
Javascript Webdev Algorithms Programming
17 days ago 126.4K views 0 shares
Technically Horrifyingly Correct
The code creates a sorting algorithm that's technically O(n) but for all the wrong reasons. Instead of actually sorting the array, it's using setTimeout() with the array value as the delay time in milliseconds. The smallest numbers appear first in the console simply because their timeouts complete faster! It's like telling your friends you've invented a revolutionary sorting algorithm, but you're actually just making each number raise its hand after waiting for X milliseconds where X equals its own value. Pure chaotic genius. The browser's event loop is doing the sorting for free! Computational complexity professors are currently rolling in their graves (even the ones who aren't dead yet).

Merge Sorting Shrek
Linux
18 days ago 60.9K views 0 shares
Merge Sorting Shrek
Content ~/media › chafa -f symbols shrek.png -s 100 | sound-of-sort -img -sort merge ascii-image-converter sauce.jpg - -color -b --dither -d 90,401 sound-of-sort -img -sort shell -delay chafa -f symbols trollface.png -s 75 I sound-of-sort -img -sort oddeven -delay 5.5 -horiz

AI Bubblesort: Technically Correct, Practically Useless
AI Algorithms Programming Debugging
1 month ago 199.9K views 0 shares
AI Bubblesort: Technically Correct, Practically Useless
Behold, the elevator panel that perfectly captures what happens when you ask AI to sort a list! The floors are in complete lexicographical order instead of numerical order because, well, that's technically sorting. Just like when you ask ChatGPT to organize your music and it puts "10 Things I Hate About You" soundtrack before "2Pac" because string comparison doesn't understand numbers. The AI followed instructions perfectly... and completely missed the point. Somewhere, a programmer is screaming about how they should have used parseInt() or a natural sort algorithm instead of letting the intern train the model on Stack Overflow answers.

Epstein Sort: Where Inconvenient Values Don't Kill Themselves
Python Algorithms Programming
2 months ago 193.9K views 0 shares
Epstein Sort: Where Inconvenient Values Don't Kill Themselves
This algorithm doesn't kill itself—it just makes inconvenient values disappear! The code starts with good intentions, but any element smaller than the current minimum gets mysteriously "[REDACTED]" instead of being properly sorted. Just like certain prison surveillance footage, some data points never make it to the final array. The comment at the bottom is even missing the return statement... because dead code tells no tales.

The Dictator's Guide To Arrays
Algorithms Math Programming
2 months ago 228.1K views 0 shares
The Dictator's Guide To Arrays
Ah, the infamous "StalinSort" – where elements don't get rearranged, they get purged . This "O(n) algorithm" is technically correct in the most horrifying way possible. Sure, you'll end up with a sorted list... mostly because you've executed all the elements that dared to be out of order. It's the same energy as fixing bugs by deleting the code that contains them. Congratulations, you've optimized your way to a solution that would make computer science professors wake up in cold sweats. Efficiency through elimination – the algorithm works because the witnesses don't.

You Asked For It
Python Algorithms Programming
2 months ago 250.2K views 0 shares
You Asked For It
Technical interviews are the ultimate game of "say what you want, get what you don't." The interviewer wanted to see your algorithm skills, maybe a nice little loop with a comparison variable. Instead, they got two lines that leverage the language's built-in methods. Technically correct—the best kind of correct. The interviewer's face is the universal expression for "I should have been more specific with my requirements." This is why senior devs write tickets with 17 paragraphs of edge cases.

Stickers (affiliate)

Git Gud or Git Rekt Bumper Sticker Window Water Bottle Decal 5"
Git Gud or Git Rekt Bumper Sticker Window Water...
100 PCS Programming Stickers for Developers, Coders, Programmers, Hackers, and Engineers | Laptop Decals for Tech Enthusiasts
100 PCS Programming Stickers for Developers, Co...
Hornet Git Gud Sticker Vinyl Bumper Sticker Decal Waterproof 5"
Hornet Git Gud Sticker Vinyl Bumper Sticker Dec...

Meet Potential Man: The Superhero Of Inefficient Algorithms
Algorithms Math Programming
4 months ago 256.4K views 2 shares
Meet Potential Man: The Superhero Of Inefficient Algorithms
OH. MY. GOD. The absolute AUDACITY of Bogo Sort, the superhero nobody asked for! 💀 This algorithm is literally just shuffling cards until they accidentally fall in order . Seven attempts to sort THREE elements?! I can't even! That's like needing seven tries to put your shoes on the right feet! And the flowchart? Check for sorted → if not, SHUFFLE EVERYTHING and pray to the algorithm gods. That's not a sorting algorithm, that's a gambling addiction with extra steps! The best part? It has "the potential to rival quicksort" in the same way I have the potential to win an Olympic gold medal if they suddenly make procrastination a competitive sport. Theoretical O(1)? Sure, and I'm theoretically dating a supermodel! 🙄

The Bogosort Dimension
Algorithms Math Programming
6 months ago 164.7K views 0 shares
The Bogosort Dimension
Ah, the mythical parallel universe where bogosort—the algorithm equivalent of throwing a deck of cards in the air and hoping they land in order—actually works reliably. In our dimension, this disaster of an O(n×n!) algorithm would take longer than the heat death of the universe to sort your Netflix queue. But somewhere out there, developers are using it in production and getting promotions while we're stuck optimizing quicksort like suckers.

Why Is No One Hiring Me? Market Must Be Dead
Javascript Webdev Algorithms Programming
7 months ago 209.0K views 0 shares
Why Is No One Hiring Me? Market Must Be Dead
On the left: "CS is dead!" crowd screaming into the void on Reddit. On the right: Developer proudly using array.sort()[0] in an interview when asked to find the smallest number in a list. Turns out the job market isn't dead—it just doesn't want people who think built-in methods are algorithmic brilliance. Who knew interviewers wanted to see you actually understand sorting algorithms instead of calling JavaScript's magical sort fairy?

An Efficient Algorithm
Algorithms Math Programming
7 months ago 184.6K views 0 shares
An Efficient Algorithm
Ah yes, the infamous "Stalin Sort" - where elements that don't fit the desired order simply... disappear. While Quicksort and Merge Sort are busy doing honest algorithmic work, Stalin Sort just executes any element that's out of place and moves on. No recursion, no partitioning, just cold, efficient elimination. O(n) performance guaranteed because dissenting elements aren't given a second chance. Probably not what they teach in CS classes, but hey, it technically produces a sorted array!