4 ms·

Man I'd be pissed if I wasted two days on getting my finger behind some idiot's stupid 'hey let's mask errors and hope they go away' tricks. Also, while the st

by roel_v 15y ago

Man I'd be pissed if I wasted two days on getting my finger behind some idiot's stupid 'hey let's mask errors and hope they go away' tricks. Also, while the story itself was sort of interesting, the format (with the chords and the House and whatnot) made it hard to follow - why not just describe the issue rather than making up schizophrenic discussions?

asto 15y ago
Yeah, I didn't even read the whole article because it was so hard to follow. Can anyone give me a decent summary?
almost 15y ago
Why? Because that's Ridiculous Fish's writing style. You may find it hard to follow but I (and presumably others) find it amusing and read his articles because of it :)
thaumaturgy 15y ago
Well, there could have been some irascible bug in a previous version of the OS that the app kept running into, and this was the programmer's method for getting around that. Or, it could have been some really sneaky bug in the program itself, something that was beyond the programmer's ability to figure out, so they did this instead and followed the industry standard advice to "just ship it". Or, maybe it's part of some framework somewhere, because somebody thought it was a good idea. It's a bit of a stretch to jump to "some idiot"; most of us are "some idiot" often enough.
- roel_v 15y ago
  Sure, but all of that still doesn't make it OK. I've shipped things with non-optimal solutions - and if somebody ever had to waste two days like this on those things, they'd have every right to be pissed. And yes some of these things does make people idiots - if it was beyond the programmer's ability to figure out, or if a 'framework' thought it was a good idea, that makes them idiots.
acdha 15y ago
It was a game: I'd give almost certain odds this was an intentional copy-protection/anti-cheating scheme.
- eridius 15y ago
  Swallowing crashes is in no way a copy-protection or anti-cheating mechanism.

by roel_v 15y ago

asto 15y ago

Yeah, I didn't even read the whole article because it was so hard to follow. Can anyone give me a decent summary?

almost 15y ago

Why? Because that's Ridiculous Fish's writing style. You may find it hard to follow but I (and presumably others) find it amusing and read his articles because of it :)

thaumaturgy 15y ago

Well, there could have been some irascible bug in a previous version of the OS that the app kept running into, and this was the programmer's method for getting around that. Or, it could have been some really sneaky bug in the program itself, something that was beyond the programmer's ability to figure out, so they did this instead and followed the industry standard advice to "just ship it". Or, maybe it's part of some framework somewhere, because somebody thought it was a good idea. It's a bit of a stretch to jump to "some idiot"; most of us are "some idiot" often enough.

roel_v 15y ago
Sure, but all of that still doesn't make it OK. I've shipped things with non-optimal solutions - and if somebody ever had to waste two days like this on those things, they'd have every right to be pissed. And yes some of these things does make people idiots - if it was beyond the programmer's ability to figure out, or if a 'framework' thought it was a good idea, that makes them idiots.

acdha 15y ago

It was a game: I'd give almost certain odds this was an intentional copy-protection/anti-cheating scheme.

eridius 15y ago
Swallowing crashes is in no way a copy-protection or anti-cheating mechanism.