Gold Member
- 2,391
- 5,218
Older developers will appreciate this one.
I believe that is not a joke, but something wonderfulgmax137 said:Where I worked we had a long, complicated program in FORTRAN that simulated the fluid flow and heat transfer in a nuclear steam supply system. Up at the very top of the FORTRAN there was a sort of Title Page written by the original author, giving the program name, his name, and the first "issue" date, day month and year 1967. We still use this today, though of course it has been modified, improved, extended, and rewritten in the subsequent versions of FORTRAN. I wasn't there in 1967 (still playing in treehouses), but the author was still there when I started working in 1980.
At times I have had to dive into code I wrote years ago. At first, I often end up thinking, who was the idiot who wrote this code?!?! OMG what was I doing?!?! Then I figure out what I was doing again. Oh. OH! Sometimes I even impress myself! LOL!Borg said:
I was often called on to fix the disasters left by others. Code that I've written in past years is often filled with expletives in the comments.Ivan Seeking said:At times I have had to dive into code I wrote years ago. At first, I often end up thinking, who was the idiot who wrote this code?!?! OMG what was I doing?!?! Then I figure out what I was doing again. Oh. OH! Sometimes I even impress myself! LOL!
I've run a fair number of upgrades to large, automated industrial lines that might cover two football fields with many thousands of IO. One interesting problem that has come up is the speed of the new processors. Systems that ran well on 90s technology suddenly have all sorts of new problems. It turned out the old systems were too slow to see various sources of noise. But the new ones do see it.Borg said:I was often called on to fix the disasters left by others. Code that I've written in past years is often filled with expletives in the comments.
public Integer getInteger(String str) {
if (str.equals("1")) {
return Integer.parseInt("1");
} else if (str.equals("2")) {
return Integer.parseInt("2");
} else if (str.equals("3")) {
return Integer.parseInt("3");
} else if (str.equals("4")) {
return Integer.parseInt("4");
} else if (str.equals("5")) {
return Integer.parseInt("5");
} else if (str.equals("6")) {
return Integer.parseInt("6");
} else if (str.equals("7")) {
return Integer.parseInt("7");
} else if (str.equals("8")) {
return Integer.parseInt("8");
} else if (str.equals("9")) {
return Integer.parseInt("9");
} else if (str.equals("10")) {
return Integer.parseInt("10");
} else if {...}
Damn straight.Borg said:
A classic.berkeman said:
DaveE said:Actually not too different than the first computer I programmed.
View attachment 316903
And yes, BTW, this was the entire system. WYSIWYG.

Thus the importance of including useful and accurate comments, especially sections that were complicated to write. I have a lot of old assembly routines I've written over the years. Without the comments I included, the routines would be pretty much inscrutable.Ivan Seeking said:At times I have had to dive into code I wrote years ago. At first, I often end up thinking, who was the idiot who wrote this code?!?! OMG what was I doing?!?! Then I figure out what I was doing again.
He left out the D. He also left out one of the E's.DaveC426913 said:
Maybe ...Economics, Design... ?symbolipoint said:He left out the D. He also left out one of the E's.

Hah! Thanks. I must've stared myself blind, as I said. I've been messing around with this almost the entire day.DaveC426913 said: