"Breathtaking" code

[t3knomanser]

Words like "breathtaking", "stunning", "astounding", "amazing", and "incredible" are not positive words. Oh, they're often used in a positive context, but in reality, they only convey a sense of wonder and disbelief. They can be applied to something horrifying just as easily as something delightful

Comments

[shoepixie]

HA! I love this entry, I really do. I know nothing of code, nothing at all, but even I could tell how breathtaking this shit was. Passwords in text files was the point that I shrieked WHAT?! at my monitor.

Your rants are always the best to read. :D

[lordindra]

The class was seriously called utility?

I could maybe see a system where a superclass called that gets created. Then various classes offering specific types of utility functions and data inherit off that.

I'm having a hard time coming up with a situation where you would set up a utility class that you use in itself. It's only slightly better than calling a class "things".

The column add bit is funny. I might do something like that if it's a quick and dirty app that I use for myself, but in code I actually expect people to pay for? Assuming the database server, whose code I have no control over, will not malfunction and write my empty columns over full columns? This would hopefully never happen, but the one time it does the client is screwed. Or if the columns can't be created on first run, it throws an error, which I then ignore. Some world class dumb here. Way too strong an assumption that other software in the system will always function correctly.

[t3knomanser]

There is a class called Utility, which does logging, encryption, and data type conversions (because they couldn't use the native functionality for this for some reason). And yes, it does encryption, not one but TWO ways (ROT13 and AES- I think only the AES is actually used), but it doesn't encrypt passwords.

The other class with a kitchen-sink set of functionality is actually the parent form. The app is an MDI application, and the main form contains all the data access and business logic. All of the other forms have to constantly call out to that form to actually get stuff done.

And yes- on first run, if it fails to create the columns, in just keeps trucking along merrily. The real irony is that this guy also wrote a DB converter to uplift the Access DB into SqlServer, but apparently didn't have IT create the columns.

Oh, also, the way he attempted to implement transactions was by sending "BEGIN TRANSACTION" to the database, instead of using the actual transaction functionality. Needless to say, it didn't work, so he actually had a

[lordindra]

This sounds like he might have run the project update wizard on the original VB6 code and made the bare minimum of manual changes to make it work under .NET.

[t3knomanser]

The update wizard was probably involved, but there's a lot of obviously new code. I think that might have been his plan, and then he discovered that the upgrade wizard sucks, and that he had to do a lot more work.

[manycolored]

This is stuff *I* would know not to do, by intuition. Even though I wouldn't have a clue how to make it do or not do these things in the first place.

WOW. You started my day off right!

[nephilimnexus]

You should have just sent them a memo that read "Much more work is needed before this software is ready to enter the closed beta test stage."

[canissum]

Sorry man. Welcome to my world.