WhatsApp devs Troll Apple with a hidden ‘F#*( you’ in Source code

[+Nik Louch Subscriber²]

2 hours ago, DevTech said:

 

I am making the assumption that you are assuming there was no code review because if they had reviewed it the English Language word you personally found offensive would have been removed.

 

Or did I miss something obviously really bad in the code algorithm?

 

My point was simply that if the code sucked then, the review process sucked, but if the "decoration" sucked, then who cares because that is just neurons wasted on a useless consideration that could instead be focused on the code.

 

 

You are assuming I found it offensive, that's quite an assumption.  Like I said above (please, read entire comments, not just the parts that suit your argument) I could say "Poopy" for all I care.  It is bad code to work towards personal opinion, code reviews are done by peers so you code to company standards and code reflects company.

 

Is the algorithm bad?  I would need to see the complete code for that to be answered, so don't try and back me into a false corner.  My personal opinion, yes it is code, the naming structure suggests as much to me and wouldn't fly.

1 hour ago, DevTech said:

I am a obsessively professional programmer

In a team or working in isolation?

[DevTech]

6 minutes ago, Nik Louch said:

You are assuming I found it offensive, that's quite an assumption.  Like I said above (please, read entire comments, not just the parts that suit your argument) I could say "Poopy" for all I care.  It is bad code to work towards personal opinion, code reviews are done by peers so you code to company standards and code reflects company.

 

Is the algorithm bad?  I would need to see the complete code for that to be answered, so don't try and back me into a false corner.  My personal opinion, yes it is code, the naming structure suggests as much to me and wouldn't fly.

In a team or working in isolation?

Actually we just started out slinging around comments without defining the conversation, so yes, in an article meant to troll people we fell into a technical discussion completely backwards full of assumptions each is making about the other.

 

WhatsApp made a lot of money and maybe we feel perhaps it was just dumb luck and had nothing to do with their code. My only point was for people to consider that before focusing on Grammar Nazi stuff...

 

Which was insanely stupid of me since a recent thread was locked when an argument over singular or plural in a single sentence spiraled out of control...

 

Obviously text style really speaks to a certain percentage of the population in a deep way and programmers are human too, so this search:

 

https://github.com/search?utf8=✓&q=style+guide&type=Repositories&ref=searchresults

 

yields  3, 767 results, which for my philosophy is 3, 767 too many results and for someone else it might be "now, that one looks interesting"

 

I don't want to paint anyone into a corner and this is essentially a problem in philosophy and psychology, not computers.

 

I am not very fond of personal opinion, my own included, so I'd rather the Silicon have the final say and it never sees any of these text variations. It is quite happy with your approach (whatever it may be) or my approach as long as we feed it the correct bits for lunch.

 

I don't want to win or lose arguments, just gain some insight or provide some insight so I think most likely that is not happening here since it all started out as off-hand comments to a stupid thread. Drop by in the programming forums some time, but this one has run its course for me because we would have to start it all over from the start with a thread title about code documentation etc and when looked at through that lens we might not even find the topic very engaging.

 

So:

 

1) we don't actually know what WhatsApp devs do.

 

2) completely sorry if I implied that any technique you personally use to feed binary bits to a CPU is any less valid than anyone elses

 

3) if the topic interests you, I will be perfectly happy to join in and politely discuss any thread you want to start in the programming forum.

 

[+Nik Louch Subscriber²]

5 hours ago, DevTech said:

Actually we just started out slinging around comments without defining the conversation, so yes, in an article meant to troll people we fell into a technical discussion completely backwards full of assumptions each is making about the other.

 

WhatsApp made a lot of money and maybe we feel perhaps it was just dumb luck and had nothing to do with their code. My only point was for people to consider that before focusing on Grammar Nazi stuff...

 

Which was insanely stupid of me since a recent thread was locked when an argument over singular or plural in a single sentence spiraled out of control...

 

Obviously text style really speaks to a certain percentage of the population in a deep way and programmers are human too, so this search:

 

https://github.com/search?utf8=✓&q=style+guide&type=Repositories&ref=searchresults

 

yields  3, 767 results, which for my philosophy is 3, 767 too many results and for someone else it might be "now, that one looks interesting"

 

I don't want to paint anyone into a corner and this is essentially a problem in philosophy and psychology, not computers.

 

I am not very fond of personal opinion, my own included, so I'd rather the Silicon have the final say and it never sees any of these text variations. It is quite happy with your approach (whatever it may be) or my approach as long as we feed it the correct bits for lunch.

 

I don't want to win or lose arguments, just gain some insight or provide some insight so I think most likely that is not happening here since it all started out as off-hand comments to a stupid thread. Drop by in the programming forums some time, but this one has run its course for me because we would have to start it all over from the start with a thread title about code documentation etc and when looked at through that lens we might not even find the topic very engaging.

 

So:

 

1) we don't actually know what WhatsApp devs do.

 

2) completely sorry if I implied that any technique you personally use to feed binary bits to a CPU is any less valid than anyone elses

 

3) if the topic interests you, I will be perfectly happy to join in and politely discuss any thread you want to start in the programming forum.

 

A somewhat verbose response.  Don't for a moment believe that I have any personal issue with you or anyone - I will argue a point quite vociferously, but I know the people here who I respect and those I don't have time for - and those I respect tend to get responses

[T3X4S]

On 9/9/2016 at 10:34 AM, Nik Louch said:

That troubles me - not because of any Apple-love, but the fact it spells out that nobody is reviewing and signing off on code, and that a developer is working in a culture where undocumented code like this is allowed.

Just like anything else - it might be "that part of the code is from [insert super awesome programmer] so we know its good...its ready"
 

[+Nik Louch Subscriber²]

2 minutes ago, T3X4S said:

Just like anything else - it might be "that part of the code is from [insert super awesome programmer] so we know its good...its ready"
 

I manage my team, and even my top-tier developers have to get sign-off on their code reviews and unit tests before I allow a go-live.  Of course there are exceptions for emergencies (that thankfully have never needed to be used) but they would then still retroactively be reviewed.

 

I would assume that an app with such a massive userbase and from a more focused company be equally stringent - because otherwise they leave themselves wide open to issues both technical and litigious.

[DevTech]

4 minutes ago, T3X4S said:

Just like anything else - it might be "that part of the code is from [insert super awesome programmer] so we know its good...its ready"
 

It will be difficult to pull on just the right string in a giant knot to get a useful discussion out of this particular thread.

 

The original is fake and so it's a bit like we are in the middle of a Saturday Night Live Sketch lampooning a TV Talk Show where the Host presents  some contradictory ridiculous propositions and then says "Discuss"

 

In general Corporate Dilbert Managers like to view employees as interchangeable widgets and so if John Carmack walked in the door and started coding, we would all laugh at the idea of reviewing his code, since he's 100 times better than anyone else on Planet Earth. The Dilbert manager would just see him as another widget. We just don't know what is going on inside WhatsApp so this thread is just going to float like an ungrounded electrical outlet...

 

Anyways, I wasn't planning to make any more comments on this subject in this particular thread, but hey it's T3X4S...

[T3X4S]

 

...and leave it to me to not read anything and just reply on the last comment solely

I think that is my queue to head to the driving range - I could use the extra practice anyway


 

[adrynalyne]

6 minutes ago, DevTech said:

It will be difficult to pull on just the right string in a giant knot to get a useful discussion out of this particular thread.

 

The original is fake and so it's a bit like we are in the middle of a Saturday Night Live Sketch lampooning a TV Talk Show where the Host presents  some contradictory ridiculous propositions and then says "Discuss"

 

In general Corporate Dilbert Managers like to view employees as interchangeable widgets and so if John Carmack walked in the door and started coding, we would all laugh at the idea of reviewing his code, since he's 100 times better than anyone else on Planet Earth. The Dilbert manager would just see him as another widget. We just don't know what is going on inside WhatsApp so this thread is just going to float like an ungrounded electrical outlet...

 

Anyways, I wasn't planning to make any more comments on this subject in this particular thread, but hey it's T3X4S...

Did you just call @Nik Louch a "corporate Dilbert manager"?

 

wow. 

[DevTech]

Just now, adrynalyne said:

Did you just call @Nik Louch a "corporate Dilbert manager"?

 

wow. 

Ah now your desire for an argument is getting over the top.

 

Did not say that at all.

 

I have no data one way or the other and so would not make such a statement.

Can we please keep the discussion at the level of useful information for people?

 

[adrynalyne]

Just now, DevTech said:

Ah now your desire for an argument is getting over the top.

 

Did not say that at all.

 

I have no data one way or the other and so would not make such a statement.

You did. Nik said that he requires all, even top devs to have code reviews and  you go on to describe thst as a corporate dilbert manager after he posted that. Come on, you are better than that. 

[DevTech]

Just now, adrynalyne said:

You did. Nik said that he requires all, even top devs to have code reviews and  you go on to describe thst as a corporate dilbert manager after he posted that. Come on, you are better than that. 

I am sorry you are misinterpreting that.

 

I was directly addressing @T3X4S and his suggestion that developers at WhatsApp of a known high caliber would be unlikely to get much "review" and was saying for most organizations, they would cheerfully not take into account anyone's abilities other than assign them to interchangeable widget bins.

 

[DevTech]

26 minutes ago, Nik Louch said:

I manage my team, and even my top-tier developers have to get sign-off on their code reviews and unit tests before I allow a go-live.  Of course there are exceptions for emergencies (that thankfully have never needed to be used) but they would then still retroactively be reviewed.

 

I would assume that an app with such a massive userbase and from a more focused company be equally stringent - because otherwise they leave themselves wide open to issues both technical and litigious.

Since I appear to be making a few comments past my intended limit, I have a minor anecdote that might interest you.

 

I knew someone who used to work on the ATI (now AMD) Video Device Driver team. In addition to using standard type coding release procedures such as you are using, they have the code riddled with massive error information and telemetry. Despite all the coding efforts, he said that on every new Driver Release, they started getting massive error data in seconds. With hundreds of millions of PC's running AMD video, the scale was just so huge.

 

So I would have to guess that WhatsApp with a user base of over 500 million must generate insane amounts of telemetry data which maybe (I'm just guessing) ends  up becoming the primary reliability vector over and above deployment procedures. (I don't know, obviously I'm just speculating). But massive scale skews the design of things well,  massively.

[+Nik Louch Subscriber²]

15 minutes ago, DevTech said:

Since I appear to be making a few comments past my intended limit, I have a minor anecdote that might interest you.

 

I knew someone who used to work on the ATI (now AMD) Video Device Driver team. In addition to using standard type coding release procedures such as you are using, they have the code riddled with massive error information and telemetry. Despite all the coding efforts, he said that on every new Driver Release, they started getting massive error data in seconds. With hundreds of millions of PC's running AMD video, the scale was just so huge.

 

So I would have to guess that WhatsApp with a user base of over 500 million must generate insane amounts of telemetry data which maybe (I'm just guessing) ends  up becoming the primary reliability vector over and above deployment procedures. (I don't know, obviously I'm just speculating). But massive scale skews the design of things well,  massively.

Oh of course.  When you scale your userbase, you in-turn scale your likelihood of error, and one school of thought involving things like standard deviation (which I only sort of understand) oddly says that you become more accepting of errors.

34 minutes ago, adrynalyne said:

Did you just call @Nik Louch a "corporate Dilbert manager"?

Outrage, outrage - personal attack

I take no offence at a comment from someone who doesn't actually know me, and I personally don't feel it was directly levelled at me.

[+Nik Louch Subscriber²]

32 minutes ago, adrynalyne said:

if John Carmack walked in the door and started coding, we would all laugh at the idea of reviewing his code, since he's 100 times better than anyone else on Planet Earth

I would be hugely surprised if he didn't have reviews.  He may well be a great games designer (hmmmm, not an opinion I'm wading into as he has as many hits as misses) but writing real-time financial software to integrate with other corporate systems - I would certainly review his code, and moreover I would expect him to understand this and respect it.  Do I see my dev's as just widgets?  Hell no, they each have various strengths, they often drive development theory in the department.

[DevTech]

6 minutes ago, Nik Louch said:

I would be hugely surprised if he didn't have reviews.  He may well be a great games designer (hmmmm, not an opinion I'm wading into as he has as many hits as misses) but writing real-time financial software to integrate with other corporate systems - I would certainly review his code, and moreover I would expect him to understand this and respect it.  Do I see my dev's as just widgets?  Hell no, they each have various strengths, they often drive development theory in the department.

That line actually came from my post, which was a reply to @T3X4S comment about exactly that situation.

 

I suspect that adrynalyne would object to appearing to be the author of that line, particularly since it is not part of the conversation thread that was ongoing at the time

[Marshall Veteran]

Edited the OP to give a link to the picture, instead of embedded. Also added NSFW tag.

 

No profanity, including pictures.

 

Regards

[DevTech]

18 minutes ago, Nik Louch said:

Oh of course.  When you scale your userbase, you in-turn scale your likelihood of error, and one school of thought involving things like standard deviation (which I only sort of understand) oddly says that you become more accepting of errors.

Outrage, outrage - personal attack

I take no offence at a comment from someone who doesn't actually know me, and I personally don't feel it was directly levelled at me.

 

it's my theory and I have no experience of that scale, that you would spend less time working on code that may or may not be more error proof but instead let the huge user base inform you on where the attention needs to go in a semi-realtime base of many rapid small updates which appears to be exactly what the industry is doing. With a large enough user base all the edge cases get exercised on time scales of seconds and minutes  in a real world manner that unit testing and in-house testing could never hope to achieve. So I'm not sure people would be more tolerant of errors, just perhaps more likely to throw stuff out there with the confidence there will be no ambiguity as to whether it worked or not. I'm just mentally working though a possible logic behind what we see happening these days...

 

Let me be perfectly clear although you have already logically inferred it, that I completely lack any data about you as a person and more importantly any data on how you go about working with software so it would be completely impossible to make a flat out statement comparing you to a comic strip character (unless of course you wanted to write an essay on the subject) and in any case I apologize if you or anyone else took offense to anything I said outside the realm of technology.

 

On tech stuff, please take offense if and only if it keeps a useful discussion going!