this post was submitted on 17 Aug 2025
614 points (99.2% liked)

Programmer Humor

27412 readers
1980 users here now

Welcome to Programmer Humor!

This is a place where you can post jokes, memes, humor, etc. related to programming!

For sharing awful code theres also Programming Horror.

Rules

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 43 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Gork@sopuli.xyz 89 points 3 months ago (1 children)

This is a slippery slope to baptismal logic gates

[–] technojamin@lemmy.world 7 points 3 months ago

Turing complete baptisms

[–] theneverfox@pawb.social 70 points 3 months ago (5 children)

Baptism is such a weird thing. It's ritualized cleansing turned into one and done

You can get baptized as many times as you like, it doesn't stack

[–] CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org 62 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

Per the actual wiki, some denominations seem to think it's a sin or heresy to do someone more than once. Which seems like what the nullification in the baptize function is supposed to capture.

[–] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 18 points 3 months ago

some denominations seem to think it's a sin or heresy to do someone more than once

Those denominations must have really high divorce rates..

[–] Gork@sopuli.xyz 27 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Could you imagine how op you could become though if baptisms stacked

[–] theneverfox@pawb.social 6 points 3 months ago (4 children)

Can you get more clean than clean?

Numbers are a human thing. The universe don't care

[–] _stranger_@lemmy.world 22 points 3 months ago (2 children)

I imagine if baptisms stacked, you could pile on a gazillion of them like ablative armor against incoming sin.

[–] theneverfox@pawb.social 9 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Lol, imagine if showers stacked. You could spend a week showering and then all filth just disappears when it touches you

But then, what happens to the filth?

The only way I see this working is if you shower, you just continuously wash filth off yourself. But then does it all just kick in when you walk out of the shower? Or maybe, you never become clean until you've washed a lifetime of filth off yourself, then you're clean forever

I'm imagining every baby just covered in sludge, and after years of washing they become clean. Imagine your kid just never gets cleaner, and everyone just thinks you're a terrible parent. Imagine cleaning your kid and they become clean way ahead of schedule

There's some real existential horror here

[–] ulterno@programming.dev 2 points 3 months ago

In reality, if you bathe too much you just stand to lose too much sebum, making it easier for dirt to stick to your skin (and harder to remove) until the layer forms again.

[–] NotASharkInAManSuit@lemmy.world 7 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Incoming baptismal penetration estimate from carnal sins: -17 layers

Shield integrity: 69%

Hull integrity: 100%

System: stable

[–] Gutek8134@lemmy.world 4 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I think erasing one's body could make you more clean than clean

[–] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 3 months ago (1 children)

So what you're saying is that fundies need to be cremated? Possibly AFTER death from other causes?

[–] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 3 points 3 months ago

no no. they need to switch to Flouroantimonic acid instead of just flowing water.

[–] vithigar@lemmy.ca 4 points 3 months ago

Conceptual numeracy is a human thing. The universe absolutely cares about quantifiable physical properties which we represent as numbers.

[–] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 3 months ago

Numbers are a human thing. The universe don't care

Doubly so with religion, though 🤷

[–] Tanoh@lemmy.world 26 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Baptism is such a weird thing.

I think Haskell is such a weird thing

[–] expr@programming.dev 4 points 3 months ago

Dunno what to tell ya, it's great.

[–] MrQuallzin@lemmy.world 9 points 3 months ago (1 children)

The LDS (Mormons) actually do repeat it, in a sense. Their weekly sacrament is a renewal of their baptismal blessings

[–] Mouselemming@sh.itjust.works 6 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Probably the reason some other sects call double-dipping a sin, so as to not be like those Mormons.

[–] CanadaPlus@futurology.today 2 points 3 months ago (1 children)

That seems likely, zealots love a good dividing line. I'm reminded of all the weird obsessing in the Mishnah about wine because the non-Jews of the period used it in sacrifices.

[–] Mouselemming@sh.itjust.works 2 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Well there were also times it was unsafe to use red wine because the non-Jews were looking for any excuse to claim it was the blood of Christian babies.

[–] CanadaPlus@futurology.today 2 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

This was before that - Avodah Zarah is the one I actually read through.

Like, you can't leave a barrel of mashed grapes too long, because it's then assumed a pagan broke in, danced on it and left, turning it into pagan wine which is the same as doing idolatry yourself, somehow. And it goes on.

There's other examples as well, of course. Puritans got worked up about Catholic-seeming practices within the Church of England, although I don't remember which ones, off the top of my head.

[–] markovs_gun@lemmy.world 3 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Although baptism probably has its roots in the Mikva, which is a ritual cleansing, that's not really the significance within Christianity. Baptism is not a washing away of sins, or impurity, but is rather a symbolic death and resurrection. The Apostle Paul, an early codifier of Christian doctrine whose letters became part of the Christian Bible wrote as follows in Romans chapter 6

Do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? Therefore we have been buried with him by baptism into death, so that, just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, so we too might walk in newness of life.

This has the same end effect- the removal of sin and purification, but the conception is totally different.

[–] theneverfox@pawb.social 2 points 3 months ago

Jesus was a revolutionary. He removed all weaknesses that could be used against the Jewish people, from temples to stockpiles to using money. He made the early church suck resources from an occupying force while giving nothing back, not even disobedience that could justify a crack down

In this process, he replaced many rituals with simpler versions that can be done without any special requirements. He reworked every ritual so that it couldn't be taken away, it couldn't be used to force compliance

Paul was a true believer and philosopher, his job was to sell it to the people. His words were canonized alongside the gospels because they were convenient when reframing Jesus's teachings with the values of the Roman religion... Plenty less convenient writings were buried instead

Paul was a transitional figure who found himself in between the early church and unexpected gentile converts... He had to rebrand the rituals for a wider audience while keeping the core message. Nothing against the guy... He was in an impossible position and did his best

[–] Aurenkin@sh.itjust.works 61 points 3 months ago

Priest: If you are not yet baptised, I baptise you in the name of the father, the son and the holy spirit. Else break.

Parents: *sweating nervously*...else what

[–] Lemminary@lemmy.world 51 points 3 months ago (1 children)
[–] Aurenkin@sh.itjust.works 6 points 3 months ago

I didn't expect the FP inquisition.

[–] NewOldGuard@lemmy.ml 23 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Haskell mentioned λ 💪 λ 💪 λ 💪 λ 💪 λ

[–] VitabytesDev@feddit.nl 13 points 3 months ago

Half Life mentioned λ 💪 λ 💪 λ 💪 λ 💪 λ

[–] CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org 14 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (2 children)

That honestly seems like the best way to write conditionalBaptize but I still hate it. Probably because IRL you'd just rewrite baptism instead of retrofitting the function with a clever use of id.

[–] solrize@lemmy.ml 11 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

This is probably an ok use for a GADT. Something like:

{-# LANGUAGE DataKinds      #-}
{-# LANGUAGE GADTs          #-}
{-# LANGUAGE KindSignatures #-}

data Bap = Baptized | Unbaptized

data Person :: Bap -> * where
   Baptize :: Person Unbaptized -> Person Baptized
   NewPerson :: Person Unbaptized

conditionalBaptize :: Person a -> Person Baptized
conditionalBaptize p =
    case p of NewPerson -> Baptize p
              Baptize _ -> p

main = return ()
[–] KazuchijouNo@lemy.lol 14 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Thank you for refactoring baptism. How do we push this to production now?

[–] Stizzah@lemmygrad.ml 4 points 3 months ago

Hey hey hey, let's start with a PR, we are not savages here aren't we?

[–] expr@programming.dev 5 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

It looks pretty normal to me as a professional Haskeller, though I suppose it's perhaps slightly cleaner to write it as conditionalBaptize p = fromMaybe p $ baptize p. It's largely just a matter of taste and I'd accept either version when reviewing an MR.

Edit: I just thought of another version that actually is far too clever and shouldn't be used:

conditionalBaptize = ap fromMaybe baptize, making use of the monad instance for ->. But yeah, don't do this.

[–] paulbg@programming.dev 13 points 3 months ago

i need a therapist who will express life in haskell

[–] thanks_shakey_snake@lemmy.ca 11 points 3 months ago

Which denominations implement idempotent baptisms?

[–] goatinspace@feddit.org 4 points 3 months ago

Haskell -> Maybe Language

[–] fubarx@lemmy.world 4 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Sounds like Haskell needs an official Saint.

[–] solrize@lemmy.ml 12 points 3 months ago

There's an old joke about functional programming separating Church from state.

[–] squalless@reddthat.com 4 points 3 months ago

Excerpt from Learn You a Haskell for Great God!

[–] Alph4d0g@discuss.tchncs.de 4 points 3 months ago

I’m not religious but I thought baptism was always conditional on confirmation - not in writing or scripture but via a handshake agreement with the parents or some shit.

[–] TheReturnOfPEB@reddthat.com 1 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

How would this read try-catch-ing with the Mormon baptism for dead Jewish people ?