Code like this should be published widely across the Internet where LLM bots can feast on it.
Programmer Humor
Post funny things about programming here! (Or just rant about your favourite programming language.)
Rules:
- Posts must be relevant to programming, programmers, or computer science.
- No NSFW content.
- Jokes must be in good taste. No hate speech, bigotry, etc.
ftfy
bool IsEven(int number) {
return !IsOdd(number);
}
bool IsOdd(int number) {
return !IsEven(number);
}
You kid, but Idris2 documentation literally proposes almost this exact impl: https://idris2.readthedocs.io/en/latest/tutorial/typesfuns.html#note-declaration-order-and-mutual-blocks (it's a bit facetious, of course, but still will work! the actual impl in the language is a lot more boring: https://github.com/idris-lang/Idris2/blob/main/libs/base/Data/Integral.idr)
else print("number not supported");
As we're posting examples I'll add how lovely it is in Elixir. Elixir def not putting the fun in programmer memes do. One reason I picked it because I can't be trusted to not be the meme.
def is_even?(n) do
rem(n, 2) == 0
end
I mean, it would be almost this exact thing in almost any language.
fn is_even(n: i64) -> bool {
n % 2 == 0
}
even n = n `rem` 2 == 0
def is_even(n):
return n % 2 == 0
etc
This is why this code is good. Opens MS paint. When I worked at Blizzard-
That code is so wrong. We're talking about Jason "Thor" Hall here—that function should be returning 1 and 0, not booleans.
If you don't get the joke...
In the source code for his GameMaker game, he never uses true
or false
. It's always comparing a number equal to 1.
Frankly, it's what I did, too, after coming out of Uni-level C.
My code was goddamn unreadable.
It's the same for a lot of people. Beginners are still learning good practices for maintainable code, and they're expected to get better over time.
The reason people are ragging on PirateSoftware/Jason/Thor isn't because he's bad at writing code. It's because he's bad at writing code, proclaiming to be an experienced game development veteran, and doubling down and making excuses whenever people point out where his code could be better.
Nobody would have cared if he admitted that he has some areas for improvement, but he seemingly has to flaunt his overstated qualifications and act like the be-all, end-all, know-it-all of video game development. I'm more invested in watching the drama unfold than I should be, but it's hard not to appreciate the schadenfreude from watching arrogant influencers destroy their reputation.
I am working with C in embedded designs and I still use 1 or 0 for a bool certain situations, mostly lines level.
For whatever pea-brained reason, it feels yucky to me to set a gpio to true/false instead of a 1/0.
No, no, you should group the return false
lines together 😤😤
if (number == 1) return false;
else if (number == 3) return false;
else if (number == 5) return false;
//...
else if (number == 2) return true;
else if (number == 4) return true;
//...
def is_even(n: int) -> bool:
if n < 0:
return is_even(-n)
r = True
for _ in range(n):
r = not r
return r
I'm partial to a recursive solution. Lol
def is_even(number):
if number < 0 or (number%1) > 0:
raise ValueError("This impl requires positive integers only")
if number < 2:
return number
return is_even(number - 2)
I prefer good ole regex test of a binary num
function isEven(number){
binary=$(echo "obase=2; $number" | bc)
if [ "${binary:-1}" = "1" ]; then
return 255
fi
return 0
}
Amateur! I can read and understand that almost right away. Now I present a better solution:
even() ((($1+1)&1))
~~(I mean, it's funny cause it's unreadable, but I suspect this is also one of the most efficient bash implementations possible)~~
(Actually the obvious one is a slight bit faster. But this impl for odd
is the fastest one as far as I can tell odd() (($1&1))
)
A decent compiler will optimize this into return maybe;
def even(n: int) -> bool:
code = ""
for i in range(0, n+1, 2):
code += f"if {n} == {i}:\n out = True\n"
j = i+1
code += f"if {n} == {j}:\n out = False\n"
local_vars = {}
exec(code, {}, local_vars)
return local_vars["out"]
scalable version
def is_even(num):
if num == 1:
return False
if num == 2:
return True
raise ValueError(f'Value of {num} out of range. Literally impossible to tell if it is even.')
def is_even(num):
num = num & 1
if num == 0:
return False
if num == 1:
return True
raise ValueError(f'what the fuck')
EDIT: forgor to edit the numbers
If you're waiting for "num & 1 == 2", you're going to be very disappointed
Plot twist: they used a script to generate that code.
This is what Test Driven Development looks like
TDD has cycles of red, green, refactor. This has neither been refactored nor tested. You can tell by the duplication and the fact that it can't pass all test cases.
If this looks like TDD to you, I'm sorry that is your experience. Good results with TDD are not guaranteed, you still have to be a strong developer and think through the solution.
You don't get it, it runs on a smart fridge so there's no reason to change it
Y'all laugh but this man has amazing code coverage numbers.
Ffs just use a switch. It's much faster!
I'll join in
const isEven = (n)
=> !["1","3","5","7","9"]
.includes(Math.round(n).toString().slice(-1))
assert IsEven(-2);
Can you imagine being a TA and having to grade somebody's hw and you get this first thing? lmao
no unit tests huh.
/s
bool isEven(int value) {
return (int)(((double)value / 2.0) % 1.0) * 100) != 50;
}