3 ms·
Can confirm, not a SV thing, plenty of it in Europe. Nothing to do with prestige, it's a simple "will this monkey jump through hoops" test to see if you'll wor
by literallycancer 9y ago
Can confirm, not a SV thing, plenty of it in Europe.
Nothing to do with prestige, it's a simple "will this monkey jump through hoops" test to see if you'll work in shitty conditions for shitty pay.
My go to response is asking them to look at my git instead, which ends the process in about half the cases. The other half they look at it for <5 minutes and point out the error that isn't an error (yes I know what an SQL injection is, and I've taken steps to make sure it won't be an issue).
- lozenge 9y agoIf I came onto your project I'd be trying to fix that SQL injection too. Why don't you add a comment explaining why you know it's safe and why you aren't using the standard way of escaping variables in SQL?
- literallycancer 9y agoThat actually didn't occur to me. I'm not sure where I'd put the comment, since in the part where router paths are set up, it's self-documenting/obvious that it isn't an issue, and if the person skips that and looks at individual functions only, then I'd have to put it in too many places.
- lozenge 9y agoI guess I'd put it in the paths, as it's something that needs to be kept in mind while updating the paths. Also in the coding conventions, but it's understandable not to have one on a small project. Another option is to create a function like _escape_numeric_string that returns its input after asserting the string is numeric and has a comment explaining, and use it everywhere. Although yes, that does mean changing all your individual functions. Generally if a code reviewer suggests a change it is worth documenting why the change isn't practical. That can be adding a test or adding a comment.