this post was submitted on 11 Oct 2025
452 points (99.6% liked)

Programmer Humor

28058 readers
638 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 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] theunknownmuncher@lemmy.world 120 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

Whenever you sit back and smile proudly to yourself about how clever the block of code you just wrote is, your next move should be to delete and rewrite it.

This is a clever block of code! Great job, now rewrite it to be sane πŸ˜‚

[–] balsoft@lemmy.ml 32 points 2 months ago (3 children)

I think it depends; some smart code is good actually, think 0x5f3759df. As long as you properly document it and leave plenty of comments. This one is not smart though, at best it's what I would call witty.

[–] theunknownmuncher@lemmy.world 23 points 2 months ago

I'd accept that "smart code" and "clever code" are 2 different things

[–] Valmond@lemmy.world 12 points 2 months ago

Fast inverse square root eh?

[–] Cethin@lemmy.zip 4 points 2 months ago

This isn't smart. This is clever. It's a way to solve a problem in a novel way. It isn't the best, or even most obvious, way to solve the problem. It's just interesting.

[–] douglasg14b@lemmy.world 68 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Still linear time at least, could always be much MUCH worse

[–] dfyx@lemmy.helios42.de 44 points 2 months ago (2 children)

There could be a hidden quadratic cost because the string needs to be reallocated and copied multiple times.

[–] Jerkface@lemmy.world 44 points 2 months ago (1 children)
[–] aaaaaaaaargh@feddit.org 11 points 2 months ago

This is the spirit

[–] kogasa@programming.dev 5 points 2 months ago

Not quadratic in the length of the input. Assuming replace is linear this is also linear

[–] lugal@lemmy.dbzer0.com 17 points 2 months ago (1 children)

True. Lost opportunity to blow things up with useless recursivity

[–] bleistift2@sopuli.xyz 17 points 2 months ago (2 children)

The word you’re looking for is recursion (see recursion).

[–] Gonzako@lemmy.world 6 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Nah, I'd like to un-see recursion. It was way overblown on uni, I barely ever use it.

[–] Cethin@lemmy.zip 10 points 2 months ago (3 children)

Recursion is amazing for a small selection of problems. Most of the time you don't need, or want, it. When it is useful though, it tends to be really useful.

I don't understand people's issue with it. I always found it easy. Maybe that's why I feel this way. Maybe if you find it challenging you want to avoid it, even when it's a good solution.

[–] kamstrup@programming.dev 4 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Most devs I know like recursion. Trouble is that many popular languages don't support tail recursion, but throw a stackoverflow error after a few thousand levels. So you have to keep track of max recursion depth manually, and it starts to look like a complicated solution

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Ephera@lemmy.ml 4 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I think, their point (and also my experience) is that you get taught about it in university a lot more than about simple loops, so it feels more important even though you rarely use it in reality.

Same thing goes for linked lists and inheritance...

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] lugal@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 2 months ago

Thanks. I knew something was off

[–] CookieOfFortune@lemmy.world 66 points 2 months ago (1 children)

This isn’t sufficiently enterprisey for Java. There should be a Roman numeral factory followed by relevant fromString and toInteger methods.

[–] vithigar@lemmy.ca 15 points 2 months ago

Ugh. Literally refactored multiple factories into straightforward functions in the most recent sprint where I work.

Someone saw a public factory method which was a factory for a reason and just cargo culted multiple private methods using the same pattern.

[–] anugeshtu@lemmy.world 40 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Why don't you just ask Chat-GPT o3 every time? Works like a charm!

[–] lugal@lemmy.dbzer0.com 48 points 2 months ago

Because there are better random generators

[–] TootSweet@lemmy.world 31 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

My first thought was something along the lines of a "zip bomb". For every "M" in the input string, it'd use more than a KiB of memory. But still, it'd take a string of millions of "M"s to exhaust memory on even a low-end modern server. Still probably not a good idea to expose to untrusted input on a public networked server, though. And it could easily peg a CPU core for a good while. Very good leveraged target for DDOSing.

[–] rooroo@feddit.org 22 points 2 months ago (1 children)

It also works the other way round: wanna convert Arabic n to Roman? Just write n times β€˜I’ and revert these replacement in inverse order.

[–] lugal@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 2 months ago (10 children)

I don't know what happens when the substring overlaps. Like for the number 6, will it replace the first 5 I's with V and end up correctly with VI or the last ones and come to IV? I would guess the former and maybe you know but I never thought about it before

[–] Atlas_@lemmy.world 6 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Also does not handle 'IIIIIIIII' -> 'IX' properly

[–] pitiable_sandwich540@feddit.org 3 points 2 months ago (1 children)

If the substitution went right to left it might work.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (9 replies)
[–] TheLazyNerd@europe.pub 19 points 2 months ago

Since Roman numerals have an upper bound, the time complexity is always O(1).

[–] Zangoose@lemmy.world 14 points 2 months ago (1 children)

They forgot "CM" so this doesn't work for any number that ends in 900s

[–] trxxruraxvr@lemmy.world 50 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

No, M will be replaced by DD and then CD will be picked up, so it will go

  1. CM
  2. CDD
  3. CCCCD
  4. CCCCCCCCC
  5. ......
[–] olafurp@lemmy.world 9 points 2 months ago (1 children)

It's not too bad, it's readable and easily optimised by adding intermediate sums and removing whatever power of 10 you're working on.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] eah@programming.dev 8 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (4 children)

It's got some code duplication. Who can code ~~gulf~~ golf this?

[–] tourist@lemmy.world 48 points 2 months ago
public static int convertRomanNumeral(String numeral) {
    return 4; // todo
}
[–] grue@lemmy.world 28 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

Code gulf, you say?

public static String
convertRomanNumeral(String numeral) {
    numeral = numeral.replace("America", "Mexico");
    return numeral;
} 
[–] deadbeef79000@lemmy.nz 5 points 2 months ago
[–] ray@sh.itjust.works 3 points 2 months ago (1 children)
public static int convertRomanNumeral(String numeral)
{
  numeral = numeral.replace("M", "DD")
    .replace("CD", "CCCC")
    .replace("D", "CCCCC")
    .replace("C", "LL")
    .replace("XL", "XXXX")
    .replace("L", "XXXXX")
    .replace("X", "VV")
    .replace("IV", "IIII")
    .replace("V", "IIIII");
  return numeral.length();
}
[–] qaz@lemmy.world 7 points 2 months ago
public static int convertRomanNumeral(String numeral)
{
  return numeral.replace("M", "DD")
    .replace("CD", "CCCC")
    .replace("D", "CCCCC")
    .replace("C", "LL")
    .replace("XL", "XXXX")
    .replace("L", "XXXXX")
    .replace("X", "VV")
    .replace("IV", "IIII")
    .replace("V", "IIIII")
    .length();
}
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world 7 points 2 months ago (1 children)
[–] trxxruraxvr@lemmy.world 33 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (2 children)

IIV would never be used. In Roman numerals at most one smaller unit can come in front of a larger one. The code doesn't do any validation though.

[–] Mirodir@discuss.tchncs.de 14 points 2 months ago

While it doesn't say anything about IIV specifically, they sure got creative enough to sometimes subtract more than one of the smaller units from a larger one.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] panda_abyss@lemmy.ca 6 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Should do a regex find all then iterate over each chunk recursively until unchanged.

[–] ZTechnical@programming.dev 9 points 2 months ago (1 children)

there was no regex in ancient rome

[–] felbane@lemmy.world 6 points 2 months ago

Actually there were seven kings prior to the establishment of the republic, at which point they expelled the rulers... a reg-ex if you will.

[–] itsraining@lemmygrad.ml 6 points 2 months ago

According to this code, "CEREAL" is a valid Roman numeral which equals 154. Great job!

[–] Wynnstan@lemmy.world 5 points 2 months ago

Alternatively pip install roman.

[–] Olap@lemmy.world 5 points 2 months ago

until(original=new) { run convertOriginal }

[–] fckreddit@lemmy.ml 5 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I just wrote something similar for decoding binary asm instructions.

[–] Valmond@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago

If you have the time it's a good solution!

[–] BlackEco@lemmy.blackeco.com 3 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Depending on the language, you may be mutating the input value, which isn't great.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] mkwt@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago (1 children)

You missed "CM," which was common in copyright statements in the 20th century.

[–] webadict@lemmy.world 9 points 2 months ago

No, they didn't.

CM becomes CDD, which becomes CCCCD which becomes CCCCCCCCC.

load more comments
view more: next β€Ί