IOS devices (iPods, iPads, iPhones) have no JavaScript debugger



  • Have you tried turning it off and on again?


  • ♿ (Parody)

    @blakeyrat said:

    Except my point is, in the situations above, by the time you "see" the problem in the console, the page unloads 0.5 milliseconds later. Unless you're suggesting that iOS' JavaScript console logs to a file somewhere I can access, it's virtually impossible (if not actually impossible) to debug situations like those using console.log(). You need a debugger to pause execution in those situations.

    Well, as I've said, I've never used it, but it seems like the console should have a setting to preserve itself when navigation happens. I've used that in chrome and firebug, at least, so it's not needed there. I don't think I've ever touched any version of Safari, so I couldn't say more.

    @blakeyrat said:

    Every other system I deal with on a day-to-day basis, including all web browsers and including the non-mobile version of Safari-- they all have debuggers!

    I've never developed for any sort of iOS, but I have team members who do. I also know that they've used whatever sort of simulator that you get along with XCode or whatever. Of course, they were developing native apps, which is a whole 'nother ballgame.

    It sounds like you've probably found some sort of difference between the mobile Safari and regular Safari, so if the iOS simulator just uses regular Safari, then I would agree with your assessment. If I were paranoid, I might say that the lack of a js debugger is an extension of only allowing native Objective C development on the devices. More likely, it's just a feature that was never implemented, because they figured that developers would have the simulator available, and already have a debugger that way.

    The real question is whether you've found a bug in the js engine, or just stumbled upon some DOM/js/whatever incompatibility or both.

    @blakeyrat said:

    How is any "professional" developer not using a debugger constantly?

    Firstly, when it's not available, like in your case. I often diagnose issues through log files, if for no other reason than I'm not going to try to attach a debugger to production. I don't think anyone is saying that your situation doesn't suck, but that the ability to overcome stuff like that is why professionals make the big bucks. And the appearance is that you're not really working to figure it out, but ranting here instead, which may or may not be true, but assuming not makes the flaming easier and more fun.



  • @charlie said:

    Have you tried turning it off and on again?
     

    Smartest post in this thread.



  • @boomzilla said:

    If I were paranoid, I might say that the lack of a js debugger is an extension of only allowing native Objective C development on the devices.

    Covered in the OP. Which you didn't read. Because you never read ANYTHING I write. Ever. And why I don't have you on whatever this forum has that passes for a block list is a complete mystery to me.


  • ♿ (Parody)

    @blakeyrat said:

    @boomzilla said:
    If I were paranoid, I might say that the lack of a js debugger is an extension of only allowing native Objective C development on the devices.

    Covered in the OP. Which you didn't read. Because you never read ANYTHING I write. Ever.

    Well, I did read the OP originally. And I reread it after this, and I really can't see how you think you covered this. You sort of said something vaguely related with respect to the original concept of web apps using html and js. I was actually referring to the original restrictions on programming languages with which you could use to target iOS. Perhaps if you slowed down and read more carefully?



  • @blakeyrat said:

    [quote user="boomzilla"]If I were paranoid, I might say that the lack of a js debugger is an extension of only allowing native Objective C development on the devices.

    Covered in the OP. Which you didn't read. Because you never read ANYTHING I write. Ever. And why I don't have you on whatever this forum has that passes for a block list is a complete mystery to me.[/quote]

    Except...

    @blakeyrat said:

    If this was a brand-new thing, like if it had come out last year, I'd be like: "oh, ok. Apple just hasn't gotten around to finishing the debugger yet, I'm sure it'll be around soon."

    If you think that a JS debugger would be something they'd add after about a year, that's about how long Apple took to release the App Store after the original launch of the iPhone, cementing their dedication to native apps.



  • What are you talking about? You have a debugger, it's called alert();!


  • ♿ (Parody)

    @toth said:

    What are you talking about? You have a debugger, it's called alert();!

    Say it again. I double dog dare you!



  • Real programmers debug with alert dialogs and log files.



  • Let me start by saying how disappointed I am by the comments in this thread. Basically it's "ur a dumb idiot!" followed by "no, ur a idiot dumb!" Is this really how far TDWTF has fallen? I expect better insults out of you all.

    @blakeyrat said:

    Hell, the original iPhone concept is that you wouldn't need "apps" because you could just write your software using HTML+JavaScript.


    Here's how I imagine it happened:

    Steve Jobs: How goes the iPhone, lackey?

    Engineer: Sir, the phone is done, but the SDK is still a year out.

    Steve Jobs: We need to release now so that the media have time to stick their tongues up my asshole before I die of cancer.

    Engineer: But how will people develop applications without an SDK?

    Steve Jobs: It has a web browser, right? Let them eat web apps. I AM THE MOST INNOVATIVE MAN EVER!

    One year later...

    Engineer: Sir, the SDK is done. People can finally write real apps for our platform, just like they've done with every other platform for several years now.

    Steve Jobs: Excellent. I smell another Time Magazine cover in my future...

    Engineer: Also, developers are complaining that Mobile Safari doesn't have built-in Javascript debugging, which makes web app development a frustrating ordeal.

    Steve Jobs: How much do we charge for web apps?

    Engineer: Well, we don't. Anyone can access any web app, assuming they can get our shitty, stripped-down browser to actually work.

    Steve Jobs: Fuck 'em.


    It's like you assume Apple is a competent software company and not a clever scam to separate worthless hipster douchebags from their parents' money.



  • @morbiuswilters said:

    Let me start by saying how disappointed I am by the comments in this thread. Basically it's "ur a dumb idiot!" followed by "no, ur a idiot dumb!" Is this really how far TDWTF has fallen? I expect better insults out of you all.

    I thought the "rub your two neurons together and see what they shit out" one was pretty good.

    *sob*



  • @morbiuswilters said:

    Engineer: Also, developers are complaining that Mobile Safari doesn't have built-in Javascript debugging, which makes web app development a frustrating ordeal.

    Steve Jobs: How much do we charge for web apps?

    Engineer: Well, we don't. Anyone can access any web app, assuming they can get our shitty, stripped-down browser to actually work.

    Steve Jobs: Fuck 'em.


    It's like you assume Apple is a competent software company and not a clever scam to separate worthless hipster douchebags from their parents' money.

    You sir, have won the thread.  No need to continue. Serioulsy.



  • @blakeyrat said:

    How is any "professional" developer not using a debugger constantly?
     

    well, i learned to program by reading source codes in a book that assumed you already know it so there were no explanations. i still prefer printf() method fairly often because it's slowness forces me to think more about what i need to watch, where, possible causes of the bug, simply put, model the working of the program in my head... as opposed to just watching the code flow. i usually use it as a last resort when i rule out all the theories why and what is going on and can't come up with any more. it makes debugging much more fun/interesting/involved for me, but then again, i'm probably not what you'd call a "professional" developer.


  • :belt_onion:

    @morbiuswilters said:

    Is this really how far TDWTF has fallen?

    Yes.

    @morbiuswilters said:

    Steve Jobs: We need to release now so that the media have time to stick their tongues up my asshole before I die of cancer.

    We've missed you.



  • @blakeyrat said:

    Also turns out: Safari runs it fine, so whatever the bug it only happens in iOS devices. So no, using Safari to debug is not useful. If you were about to suggest that. It pissed me off, so here's the post.
     

    Are you using js to open another window?



  •  All this dickslobbering you people are doing to Morbius is kind of annoying.

     

     

     

     

     

    I thought we had something exclusive, Morbsy my little hobbit. :'(


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @lettucemode said:

    @ASheridan2 said:

    Yeah, because heaven forbid we actually think outside the box a little and add a few output messages here and there to act as manual breakpoints.

    Sure, it's not the nicest of ways to debug, but it would have stopped blakey from giving the customer something that didn't even work.

     

    It's not just "not the nicest of ways to debug", it's the obsolete way to debug...

    Especially if what you're debugging is time-sensitive, because - like - if you're spending time stepping through code while it's trying to do stuff, what it's interacting with decides to time you out because you're not quick enough in your debugging. Clearly using a debugger is the way to go here since it's so much better than printf's because otherwise you might be able to fix any problems.

  • sekret PM club

    Not to derail the massive amounts of vitriol flying through the tubes, but I managed to run across something that may make Blakey's life with this iOS JS debugging bollocks a bit easier. I haven't tested this personally, mind, as I'm not a developer, but from reading through the readme it seems like it might be able to help.

     Aardwolf

     Now back to your regularly scheduled flamewars, right here, on Channel TDWTF!



  • @e4tmyl33t said:

    Aardwolf

    Interesting. Of course, it's an open source geek project so I'm sure it's absolute torture to use-- notably they don't show the UI at all.

    They "pause execution" by sending an asynch XmlHttpRequest, I don't see how that could possibly work in a BeforeUnload handler... and would only work for a few seconds max in the link/form submission handlers, so you better be quick with your debugging!


  • sekret PM club

    I wasn't sure whether or not it would help (I've never written Javascript before), but I figured it wouldn't hurt to link it. Every other result I'm coming up with is either another variant of the process that thing uses (using some sort of server and passing the code through it to parse and debug) or they're the console output-type, which has already been brought up here, torn to shreds, and spat upon.

    From looking at all these results, I feel your pain. It seems like mobile web app development is sorely lacking in some tools, not just for iOS, but across the board.


  • sekret PM club

    Also, since the edit timer expired on my last post before I could finish typing (Damn you, CS!), I did see that while mobile Safari uses basically the same engine as Safari's desktop client, there are a bunch of additional restrictions placed on it to keep it from slowing down/hosing/whatnot the mobile device.

     If one of those restrictions is what's causing your problem, it might be possible to recreate using Safari on the desktop by changing the user agent string and using the desktop's debugging tools to "force" those restrictions into place. (Guide to enable this ability and set it in Safari here.)

     No offense intended if you've already tried this, just throwing more possibilities into the ring.



  • @PJH said:

    Especially if what you're debugging is time-sensitive, because - like - if you're spending time stepping through code while it's trying to do stuff, what it's interacting with decides to time you out because you're not quick enough in your debugging. Clearly using a debugger is the way to go here since it's so much better than printf's because otherwise you might be able to fix any problems.

    My sarcasm-dar is in the red.

    If you're going to strip away the context of the discussion like that, then I guess I have to agree with you. However, to my knowledge, implementations of printf or sprintf for Javascript just return a formatted string. So to output it you still have to pop up an alert window, meaning that it has exactly the same effect as breakpoints on time-sensitive code in the situation you describe. So nyah.



  • @lettucemode said:

    However, to my knowledge, implementations of printf or sprintf for Javascript just return a formatted string.

    The closest thing JavaScript has to printf is console.log(), which I believe is now supported in all browsers, or at least all browsers with a decent marketshare.

    @lettucemode said:

    So to output it you still have to pop up an alert window,

    Wrong.

    Although you *could* also show alerts with your console.log() string, but that has additional problems:
    1) Alerts don't even show on mobile browsers, so that's fucking useless
    2) You still can't debug a BeforeUnload handler that way
    3) And of course all the other reasons debugging using alert() is stupid, such as it changing the focus on the page (try debugging a Focus or Blur handler that way!), it masking network time-outs that occur while the alert box is open, etc etc etc etc.



  • @blakeyrat said:

    You still can't debug a BeforeUnload handler that way
     

    Shoot off a quick httprequest to some server-side code that gives you the error?



  • @dhromed said:

    @blakeyrat said:
    You still can't debug a BeforeUnload handler that way
    Shoot off a quick httprequest to some server-side code that gives you the error?

    99% of the time, the exact thing I'm debugging is why the browser won't let me send a http request during BeforeUnload.

    Are people done with the stupid recommendations? Can we all just agree the lack of a debugger is a huge WTF and move on?


  • ♿ (Parody)

    @blakeyrat said:

    Are people done with the stupid recommendations? Can we all just agree the lack of a debugger is a huge WTF and move on?

    I thought they were moving on and were talking about other things that interested them or that they don't understand. Did anyone really disagree that it should have a debugger? I thought it was mostly people trying to think up ways to get something resembling a debugger, or at least mocking you for not trying that yourself.



  • @boomzilla said:

    @blakeyrat said:
    Are people done with the stupid recommendations? Can we all just agree the lack of a debugger is a huge WTF and move on?

    I thought they were moving on and were talking about other things that interested them or that they don't understand. Did anyone really disagree that it should have a debugger? I thought it was mostly people trying to think up ways to get something resembling a debugger, or at least mocking you for not trying that yourself.

    So blakeyrat notes that a product doesn't have a debugger and people mock him for not using an alternative?  That's like mocking a car reviewer for noting that a car doesn't turn left; he could always just make three rights.  This is not about how to do it.  It's about the fact that the right way to do it isn't possible and the vendor should be publically ridiculed.

  • ♿ (Parody)

    @Jaime said:

    So blakeyrat notes that a product doesn't have a debugger and people mock him for not using an alternative?  That's like mocking a car reviewer for noting that a car doesn't turn left; he could always just make three rights.  This is not about how to do it.  It's about the fact that the right way to do it isn't possible and the vendor should be publically ridiculed.

    That's one way to misinterpret the situation. To amend your analogy, a customer has required that blakeyrat use that particular car to go somewhere (not just "review the car"), and people were suggesting different ways to effect a left turn and mocking blakeyrat for apparently throwing his hands up in the air instead of coming up with a work around for the WTFery of the car manufacturer.

    See, people were actually trying to be helpful(ish, according to sidebar standards) in looking for alternatives. It's important to note that this wasn't a story about how he had to deal with stupid workarounds to get something to work for a customer.



  • @boomzilla said:

    mocking blakeyrat for apparently throwing his hands up in the air instead of coming up with a work around

    There is no workaround.

    The real problem is people coming here and posting "workarounds" that don't work. I have a pretty good imagination when it comes to scenarios like this, and I can't think of a single workaround.

    The deeper problem is that there's a bunch of people posting here who don't understanding what a JavaScript debugger is and the super mega problem is that there's a subset of them who think using console.log() is good enough. Those people need to leave the industry. Now.



  • @blakeyrat said:

    @boomzilla said:
    mocking blakeyrat for apparently throwing his hands up in the air instead of coming up with a work around
    There is no workaround.

    The real problem is people coming here and posting "workarounds" that don't work. I have a pretty good imagination when it comes to scenarios like this, and I can't think of a single workaround.

    The deeper problem is that there's a bunch of people posting here who don't understanding what a JavaScript debugger is and the super mega problem is that there's a subset of them who think using console.log() is good enough. Those people need to leave the industry. Now.

    So, did you ever deliver the product to the customer or did you, with your remarkably honed interpersonal skills, tell him to FOAD because you can't be arsed to maybe, perhaps, do it the hard way?  Or maybe tell him the truth: that you're too busy yelling at people on the intertubes.

    Just curious...


  • ♿ (Parody)

    @blakeyrat said:

    @boomzilla said:
    mocking blakeyrat for apparently throwing his hands up in the air instead of coming up with a work around

    There is no workaround.

    The real problem is people coming here and posting "workarounds" that don't work. I have a pretty good imagination when it comes to scenarios like this, and I can't think of a single workaround.

    The deeper problem is that there's a bunch of people posting here who don't understanding what a JavaScript debugger is and the super mega problem is that there's a subset of them who think using console.log() is good enough. Those people need to leave the industry. Now.

    OK, well, it sounded like logging to a console would be an option, even if not ideal. Your main objection (as to whether it could actually work) was that console logs don't persist past navigation. I mentioned that this was an option in at least a few browsers, and seemed pretty standard. Maybe that's not in the loggers mentioned, and therefore you're correct. I didn't see anything about that aspect after I mentioned it, which is why I can only assume that it may still be an option, since I'm not a mind reader.

    And if you can't tell the difference between "good enough to fix this problem for my customer" and "good enough not to be a WTF," then you're clearly in the wrong industry.



  • I can't help but wonder about the premise here.  If the problem involves the browser implementing a feature incorrectly, which is what it sounds like, then what useful information do you hope to gain by debugging the script that's calling the browser feature?  I'll freely admit that web development isn't my area of expertise, but I do know a thing or two about scripting, and it kind of sounds like you're focusing on the wrong layer.  Shouldn't you be calling Apple out about not having a debugger for the browser? :P



  • @Sutherlands said:

    I don't read the post where he mentions "professionals" to say that he can't figure it out.  It's just the normal blakeyrant about how tools are crap and people should be demanding better.



    I don't get it. Joel has been saying this for ages and people praise him but now Blakeyrat say more or less the same (with reason) and is a bad rant. What's wrong with all of us , people?



  • @spamcourt said:

    @Sutherlands said:
    I don't read the post where he mentions "professionals" to say that he can't figure it out.  It's just the normal blakeyrant about how tools are crap and people should be demanding better.


    I don't get it. Joel has been saying this for ages and people praise him but now Blakeyrat say more or less the same (with reason) and is a bad rant. What's wrong with all of us , people?
    Haven't you heard of the old saying, "it's not what you say, but how you say it?"  Well, one can speak eloquently about a problem (and it is a problem), or like blackey, you can rant and rave calling everybody a drooling moron. This is especially funny since he came here asking for peoples help or opinions.  I don't think anybody said it's a WTF that there isn't a built-in JS debugger or an add-on, but when people give you workarounds, don't be a complete dick and ream everybody out.  He's just pissed that he has to do the old alert() or console.log workaround, and like a little kid who doesn't uderstand their own feelings, he directs it at anybody within reach.

    If he doesn't like people commenting on his problems, he's free to not post here.



  • @Mason Wheeler said:

    I can't help but wonder about the premise here.  If the problem involves the browser implementing a feature incorrectly, which is what it sounds like, then what useful information do you hope to gain by debugging the script that's calling the browser feature?  I'll freely admit that web development isn't my area of expertise, but I do know a thing or two about scripting, and it kind of sounds like you're focusing on the wrong layer.  Shouldn't you be calling Apple out about not having a debugger for the browser? :P

    He's probably hoping for a workaround in Javascript, which is usually how you deal with browser bugs.



  • @boomzilla said:

    That's one way to misinterpret the situation. To amend your analogy, a customer has required that blakeyrat use that particular car to go somewhere (not just "review the car"), and people were suggesting different ways to effect a left turn and mocking blakeyrat for apparently throwing his hands up in the air instead of coming up with a work around for the WTFery of the car manufacturer.

    Here's a better analogy:

    Blakeyrat awakes to find himself sitting in a pool of his own blood. The shaft of his penis is handcuffed to a water pipe which runs through the cement wall. Nearby is a rusty hacksaw which is too dull to cut through steel, but can probably manage to cut through flesh with a few hours of effort.

     

    Knowing he will die here, Blakeyrat opens his parched lips to croak out "Who are you!? Why are you doing this to me!?!"

     

    From the darkness comes a voice "Blakeyrat, it's the rest of the TDWTF forum members, we're here."

     

    "HELP ME!!" Blakeyrat screams. "You've got to get the key for the handcuffs so I can get out of here!"

     

    "There's no time, Blakeyrat." As the other TDWTFers step into the light, we see the crotches of their pants stained in blood. "We may never pleasure a woman again, but at least we will LIVE, Blakeyrat, at least we will live!"

     

    "This is terrible!!" laments Blakeyrat.

     

    "Are you just going to whine all day?" asks one of the survivors. "We provided you with a workaround, why are you such a Mr. Complainy-Pants?"

     

    "Heck," says another forum member "I honestly prefer using a hacksaw to handcuff keys. It forces me to think, ya know?"

     

    Blakeyrat lets out a blood-curdling screech as the madness consumes his mind.


  • BINNED

    @blakeyrat said:

    @C-Octothorpe said:
    How fucking stupid are you?

    Based on this thread? Well above average.

     

    Somehow, this reminds me of a famous quote from alt.flame:

    "Your stupidity, Allen, is simply not up to par."
    "Well, Yours is."


  • ♿ (Parody)

    @spamcourt said:

    @Sutherlands said:
    I don't read the post where he mentions "professionals" to say that he can't figure it out.  It's just the normal blakeyrant about how tools are crap and people should be demanding better.

    I don't get it. Joel has been saying this for ages and people praise him but now Blakeyrat say more or less the same (with reason) and is a bad rant. What's wrong with all of us , people?

    It seems like some of us have a difficult time separating out different concepts? Did Joel actually say that when presented with shitty tools we should give up? Because that's the problem I have with what blakeyrat has said in this thread.

    I totally agree with him that the shitty tools are shitty tools. And I suspect that morbs' dramatization is more right than wrong as to why it is the way it is.

    I understand blakey's frustration with posts that suggest something that's already been mentioned, but that's another issue altogether.



  • Yes.



  • @blakeyrat said:

    Yes.

    Well, THAT clears up EVERYTHING!

    blakey, what are you agreeing with?



  • @blakeyrat said:

    99% of the time, the exact thing I'm debugging is why the browser won't let me send a http request during BeforeUnload.

    Intuition suggests that, for reasons which should be obvious, You Shouldn't Do That, and that as a consequence, You Can't Do That.



  • @blakeyrat said:

    ...

    @Master Chief said:

    Consumer devices have no use for a javascript debugger, really. That said some type of Safari-on-iOS emulator for a Mac desktop makes a ton of sense.

    There's a "simulator", but the problem is:

    1) There's no Macs around here, and the client already balked when we charged them for the iPad. (Yes, I know, the Real WTF is that I work at a web company that doesn't have 57,000 Apple iDevices sitting all around.)

    2) The "simulator" probably wouldn't exhibit the bug, since desktop Safari also doesn't exhibit the bug. It's not an emulator-- it doesn't act the same as an actual iPad.

    3) Any software program that can be programmed needs a fucking debugger. Raise your fucking standards and stop putting up with shitty software. It's in-fucking-excusable for Apple to not offer a JavaScript debugger for iOS' Safari, even though I'm sure I'm going to get 57,000 idiotic replies to this topic telling me I'm wrong for 57,000 different idiotic reasons, all of which sum to: "because I don't give a shit."

    And just to stave off the next idiotic post, "herp derp how do you put a JS debugger on such a tiny screen derp derp derp," I'm not asking for a local debugger, I'm asking for any debugger.

     

    this reminds me of a problem a friend of mine had, he works making games for phones and tablets (they use unity btw.) They had a bug on an iPad (or an iPhone i can't remeber), and couldn't debug it, so they decided to go old school and create a log. So after much effort they finally reproduce the bug while logging, when they realize that you can't access the filesystem of an iOS device; the log was stuck on the iPad!

     



  • @boomzilla said:

    You put in statements that firstly tell you whether a certain bit of code is even being reached. Then, you can find out if its some weird data or what that's going on. Essentially, you're logging stuff to the console (or putting in alerts, or whatever) and making inferences based on that.
     

    *Ring ring* It's the Sixties calling, they'd like their debugger back.

    Seriously, that approach was "debugging 101" forty years ago. Today we are 12 freaking years into the 21st century. We should have 21-st century tools.

    There was a post above talking about what to do with shitty tools. What we should do with shitty tools is vote with our wallets and buy elsewhere.

    Yes, I know there is a critical mass of Apple's shit in the market but it still needs software companies saying "developing X for iPad will cost you 10x the price" to their customers and those customers then going to Apple and saying "we are not buying iPads because our software won't run on them" and maybe Apple, faced with loss of sales, will fix the fucking issue. Or maybe not. They are a huge Cthulhuesqe organisation that probably gets enough money from Apple fanbois.

     The Real WTF is Apple.



  • And yet I Must Do That, so.



  •  @blakeyrat said:

    1) Alerts don't even show on mobile browsers, so that's fucking useless 

    Someone should probably tell Google then, because Android shows alerts just fine.

     



  • @blakeyrat said:

    @e4tmyl33t said:
    Aardwolf

    Interesting. Of course, it's an open source geek project so I'm sure it's absolute torture to use-- notably they don't show the UI at all.

    They "pause execution" by sending an asynch XmlHttpRequest, I don't see how that could possibly work in a BeforeUnload handler... and would only work for a few seconds max in the link/form submission handlers, so you better be quick with your debugging!

    <font size="150%">Possible tool to do debugging, but may not be true step debugger</font>

    In addittion to that project, there's Socketbug. There are several videos that show the basics, show it in action, show how to get the server and console set up:

    Socketbug

    And, to make sure Blakey knows I've read the thread, I see that the problem you're actually fact involves a BeforeUnload handler, so this may have the same problem as Aardwolf and won't help. It's at least something more than a simple console. This project also lets you take HTML source and ship it back and forth between the mobile device and desktop device and actually show edits and return them (see the video).


    <font size="125%">alert() is NOT a DEBUGGER. console.log() is NOT a DEBUGGER.</font>



  • @C-Octothorpe said:

    This is especially funny since he came here asking for peoples help or opinions.

    I got the impression he wasn't actually after assistance but was venting the WTF, maybe in frustration that it was partly as a result of his own decisions. This could explain why many suggestions received the response they did in comparison to the response to db2's point.

    It's still entertaining, nonetheless.



  • @Cassidy said:

    @C-Octothorpe said:

    This is especially funny since he came here asking for peoples help or opinions.

    I got the impression he wasn't actually after assistance but was venting the WTF


    The really funny thing is that the one time I've seen him be appreciative of a solution to one of his myriad problems, the person who gave him the solution gave a completely incorrect explanation of why it worked, and Blakey didn't express any appreciation to the people who gave a correct explanation.



  • @pjt33 said:

    the person who gave him the solution gave a completely incorrect explanation of why it worked, and Blakey didn't express any appreciation to the people who gave a correct explanation.

    Why would I give a shit why it worked, so long as it did work?

    You people have some weird ideas about me.



  • @blakeyrat said:

    @pjt33 said:
    the person who gave him the solution gave a completely incorrect explanation of why it worked, and Blakey didn't express any appreciation to the people who gave a correct explanation.

    Why would I give a shit why it worked, so long as it did work?

    You people have some weird ideas about me.

    Anyone who can say that with a straight face needs to get out of the industry ASAP.  Programmers writing code and not knowing why it work the way it does are a menace to us all.


Log in to reply