Well That Was Not In Test Cases

Content SOFTWARE ENGINEER CHEAT SHEET Source:TheCooperReview.com It's a non-trivial amount of work I won't be able to copy and paste This is a temporary This is a permanent solution solution lIl be finished by Monday That's funny Do you want it done fast or do you want it done right? Just file a bug I won't tell you which Monday I literally hate you It will be neither I have no idea what you're saying right now That's an expansion forgot you needed that feature of scope We can't test that We can but we won't I'll just put it behind a flag for now It will never ship I can't realistically estimate that - I don't know how estimates work I don't think users will care about that have dinner reservations at 8 This is an Alpha release It doesn't work This is a Beta release We fixed a lot of bugs but it still doesn't work I'll add that to the I'm hoping you'll forget about it backlog We are focusing on - I'm going to go take a nap high priority fixes only

Asking how to check LLM code quality without being an expert is like asking how to check if your parachute works without jumping out of a plane. The irony is delicious - you're using an LLM to ask how to evaluate LLM-generated code. It's the digital equivalent of asking a toddler if they think they should have more candy. The answer is always "yes" and always suspiciously in their favor.

Ah, the classic "it works but I have no idea how" scenario! The bird drawings perfectly capture the chaos of software development. You start with a well-designed bird (your initial clean code), then it gets progressively more abstract yet somehow still flies (functions). Every developer has experienced that moment when your code resembles the bottom-left bird - a tangled mess of spaghetti logic, nested if-statements, and emergency patches - yet somehow it still performs its core function like the bird on the bottom-right. The true horror isn't that it works despite looking like a nightmare - it's that nobody dares refactor it because it might stop working altogether! Ship it to production anyway!

Content Build Docs 6889 6890 6891 6892 6893 6894 6895 6896 6897 6898 SISPE Files Bytes Times Total Copied 411 411 1750 1750 22.31 m 22.31 m 0:00:03 0:00:00 Skipped Mismatch FAILED 0:00:00 0:00:00 Speed Speed 39938493 Bytessec. 2285.298 MegaBytesmin. Ended: Tuesday, March 8, 2022 8:45:13 AM 6900 6901 6902 Error: Process completed with exit code Found this after wasting hours scrolling through the logs for errors: Value Description No files were copied. No failure was met. No files were mismatched. The files already exi in tne destination directory: so the copy operation was skipped All files were copied successfully. There are some additional files in the destination directory that aren't present in the sou directory. No files were copied Some files were copied. Additional files were present. No failure was met. Some files were copied. Some files were mismatched. No failure was met. 8 Additional tiles and mismatched files exist. No files were copied and no failures were me Which means that the files already exist in the destination directory. Files were copied, a file mismatch was present, and additional files were present. Several files didn't copy.

Oh honey, you think you're a coding genius with your regex masterpiece? PLEASE! You've just created the programming equivalent of ancient hieroglyphics that even archaeologists would give up on! 💅 That beautiful Martin Fowler quote is SCREAMING at all you regex wizards who craft these incomprehensible one-liners that make future developers contemplate career changes. Sure, your computer understands it. Your colleagues? They're quietly plotting your demise while drowning in regex documentation.

Content me python 4 spaces 4 spaces is the same as is the same as 1 tab 1 tab 4 spaces is the same as 1 tab! Indentation error!