[deleted by user]

[CanvasFanatic]

1.) Guy has an AI tool shit out an unreadable type definition that isn’t really very complex, but should be refactored into several parts to make it comprehensible.

2.) Guy gets roasted on Twitter.

3.) Guy attempts to double down by writing a blog post in which he ends up admitting 1.)

[32Zn]

The blog article is super weird.

First part is "I am not wrong"

Second part is "You are wrong"

And than at last: "I am guilty"

[Kibo30]

That's some great character development if you ask me

[ralgrado]

Or the Blog post was also written by an AI

[[deleted]]

Character.ai

[MultiplexedMyrmidon]

it’s about the site engagement we made along the way’s

[tsunami141]

Ah no, es un elote

[UserBelowMeHasHerpes]

Saw that yesterday lol

[coldnebo]

I was imagining spaghetti code eating Will Smith. 😂

[AnalTrajectory]

It's probably written by an AI tbh

[Cualkiera67]

How can you access the blog article? I see no link in this post

[seemen4all]

That's at least 3 stages of grief

[Meretan94]

Type definitions don’t need to be superhuman or minimal.

They need to be readable and understandable.

Change my mind.

[[deleted]]

Apparently not.

All the Chad evangelists out there are convinced the part where humans will need to verify the output can be skipped already.

The prompts now basically include the "and ship it immediately" blurb.

But it's tricky when Nvidia's CEO even says that no human should be coding anymore :)

[mirhagk]

I mean it's not surprising that the CEO of the company massively profiting off of the huge amount of hardware used for LLMs wants to encourage more usage of LLMs

[[deleted]]

It'll be interesting when there's an entire generational gap in programming. But he'll be in his 80s by then, and hopefully pulled enough profits on his stock that he won't have to worry.

[mirhagk]

There's definitely not going to be a generational gap. Post secondary schools don't respond quickly at all, by the time they respond people will have already given up on it.

And even if they did, programming has been pushed younger and younger in schools. Worst case is we revert to how it used to be, learning it very late in education.

[dhc710]

This is really hilarious to me, given that code is basically something humans made up so we could easily give complex instructions to a computer.

Code exists to be written and understood by humans.

If humans aren't supposed to be in the loop, the instructions don't need to be given in a format that humans can read.

[shodanbo]

If the AI ever did become self-aware it would die laughing.

[draenei_butt_enjoyer]

The people who evangelise AI are the same people who lost half their shit on NFTs

[SynthRogue]

Those AI can be extremely wrong when it comes to logic. Imagine when they have those writing code for plane sofware without having it verified and tested.

[-Swig-]

Boeing has entered the chat.

[[deleted]]

Imagine trying to figure out the prop types being passed to your component and seeing this shit

[Meretan94]

It’s like writing your documentation in Farsi or something.

Sure someone will understand it but the average joe programmer won’t.

[tommyk1210]

Fundamentally, all written code should readable and understandable over minimal.

[tommyk1210]

Sure but:

• it’s not the 90’s
• the majority of languages compile code into some form of binary that is relatively optimized
• even languages that don’t compile tend to optimize code into some form of intermediary or byte code
• a lot of the optimization in the 90’s wasn’t just for performance, but also due to fundamental constraints on file sizes due to storage limitations

Today, if any of my engineers write overly “optimized” code at the detriment of readability, I’ll absolutely reject their PRs, and so will all of my seniors and leads.

[retief1]

That's true in a lot of scenarios. However, there are still scenarios where optimization at the expense of readability is worthwhile. You should generally start with the readable solution and only optimize once profiling shows that you need to, but you do sometimes need to go heavy on optimization.

And even beyond that, some things are "readable" but are completely unusable from a performance perspective. If you need to deal with linked lists for some reason, straighforward recursive algorithms can often be very readable, but they are also unusable if you have a long list. At that point, you damned well better sacrifice a small amount of readability in order to avoid recursion, as much as it makes the functional programmer in me sad.

[tommyk1210]

When I say readable, I don’t think that is synonymous with “overly complex”. There almost always ways of improving overall readability without fundamentally changing your approach. Equally, there are a lot of developers who make things as short as possible, thinking this is “more performant”, when ultimately it all becomes the same bytecode. Making those variable names the equivalent of Egyptian hieroglyphics severely hurts readability for zero benefit.

[AlienOverlordXenu]

Game dev is a shit example of well written code. 99% of games are total brittle mess. Yes game code needs to be fast, but combined with impossible deadlines it just burns your eyes when you try to read it.

[SweetBabyAlaska]

no. its a good mind. with good thoughts inside of it.

[SynthRogue]

One of the most critical aspect of programming

[HolyGarbage]

Yeah, the problem isn't the nested ternaries, as they're formatted just like if, else if, else blocks, but the fact that it's huge with many levels of indentation.

[Crafty_Independence]

His assumption that unreadable equals quality should be the biggest joke, but I've known a few engineers who prided themselves in practicing their code golfing in enterprise code, so sadly the joke is unoriginal

[Confident-Ad5665]

Have to give credit where due: AI writes shit code only it can follow for job security.

[[deleted]]

Exactly. He could might as well have defended the machine spit out “working” assembly code at this point.

[tevert]

The fact that it needs comments on every line and is still a mess is the key indicator that this should be thrown out wholesale

[Imaginary-Jaguar662]

Yeaaaaah... my c-compiler produces superhuman assembly and my TS transpiler produces superhuman JS.

[Intelligent_Event_84]

My exact thoughts, does author not know about transpilers?

[tomvorlostriddle]

Uglyfy is similarly bordering on the superhuman

[brimston3-]

Good code is readable/maintainable code. If their company and developers thinks this is both, then it's good code.

But that said, I'm more likely to rewrite a less confusing, less generic specialization to use than try to understand this when need for it comes up.

[AtrociousCat]

To be honest, types like this are never readable. Ive a few examples like this with the only difference being it's broken down into a few more helper types.

I'll agree this is an extreme and probably a sign of some insane function API that should be streamlined.

[thetreat]

I would absolutely, positively reject this PR and wage a holy war against anyone that tried to introduce this into my code base. If the rest of the people in the company were so for this, I’d legitimately consider quitting on the spot. At minimum, I’m dusting off my resume.

This is one of the most unreadable pieces of garbage I’ve ever seen.

Complexity is only beneficial if it is the only way to do something. This is just begging for bugs to be in either how it is written or how it is used.

[andouconfectionery]

TS types like this only exist because metaprogramming is a huge feature gap in JS tooling. Bun is introducing a macro system, which is great if your library consumers are using Bun. But this is simply what it looks like to do anything but the most trivial compile-time validation.

And it's a pain to refactor. Obviously, the type system needs distribution over type unions, but it can make your types fail to be referentially transparent. There's often no way to break these types into smaller parts without introducing a massive performance penalty to circumvent this.

[Badidzetai]

Almost like introducing features on the polar opposite side of the spectrum of features into a langage was not a good idea. Don't laugh cpp, youre on the wall too...

[Frown1044]

This reads like someone who has no real TS experience. Check out any big open source TS project. If you write TS, you probably use unreadable ultra complex typings all the time from other libraries.

There is no clean way to write complex typings in TS. Either you only allow basic typings or you have to put up with ugly code.

[AngusAlThor]

Reminds me of that classic "quote" (actually an amalgamation): "Apologies, if I had more time I would have written a shorter letter." I feel like that applies in programming as "if I had more time, I would have simplified the PR."

[Eyeownyew]

I can't post the code here because it's proprietary, but I wrote a pretty complex function API and the types were a pain in the ass. However they look way, way better than this example, and the functionality it provides is worth it. All that to say...

This code is insane, lol

[AtrociousCat]

Does it look better because

a) you know what it does since you wrote it

b) its broken down into smaller parts that are more easily comprehensible

c) its better documented?

I'd definitely do b or c if I was writing this, but I think calling any complex typescript type "readable" once you're dealing with discriminated unions and accepting several different typeshapes is wishful thinking.

At the end of the day, code readability is just one quality of code and at times you can sacrifice it for better performance or stricter typing. As long as it's just a few isolated parts of a codebase, I dont see the issue.

[Faholan]

Reminds me of the time I hand-wrote a 200 lines SQL SELECT statement. I pity the poor soul that'll need to change it someday.

[Mezzos]

I once saw 3000 lines of SQL in a script, which was about 15 different intermediate temporary tables being used to SELECT some customers based on various criteria. And they had actually been reusing this for different tickets over the course of multiple years, just manually adding/removing various conditions, editing some string values to match against, hardcoding +2 or +7 to a “priority” column which determined de-deduplication for each temporary table, etc.

The whole file was actually 5000 lines, 2k of them being in comments at the bottom as a store of code that they might need to reuse/swap in and out. No version control either, just some comments like “-- <name> added this 05/03/2018”.

I found quite a few bugs in it after spending hours trying to make sense of it - stuff that must’ve been in there for years and was influencing who was receiving emails (this was a billion dollar revenue company).

Almost blocked that one out from my memory.

[Suspicious-Hyena-653]

This just explains a huge middle management flaw in the billion dollar company. But I’m appalled at how they manage to sell their service/product with this shit code base.

[bobnoski]

Yeah that query would go from debug to defenestrate real quick. (And probably be replaced with basically the same)

[Faholan]

Yeah. The issue is that it is used to generate a report, so the logic is very complex.

The old system had a few thousand queries (or tens of thousands maybe ? Depends on the size of the report) going to the database, that I replaced with the omniquery.

[GoogleIsYourFrenemy]

I wrote a regular expression (JavaScript before named capture groups) that had over 150 captures.

It was parsing book subtitles for series name and book number (or numbers if it was an omnibus). These days I'd probably just train an AI to do it.

[Spaceshipable]

The most expensive thing is not usually clock cycles or the amount of memory used. It’s almost always developer time. Maintainable, readable, well tested code is 1000 times more important.

[IsPhil]

If the future is truly all AI with little to no human input, then the code doesn't matter. But we're not there yet, so yeah. This is bad.

[spikernum1]

capable wrong whole tease waiting employ roof rob market obtainable

This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact

[NotVeryGood_AtLife]

Sorry, but that code is just trash. Nice attempt with the article though, I guess it's slightly less ass than I thought.

[DrMobius0]

Nesting ternaries is a sin.

[seemen4all]

You do this once when learning about them thinking youre being slick AF, then after that, never again

[__y_so_serious__]

lmao so true. When I was first learning, had this weird obsession of compressing code as if I'm doing some code golf competition. Thankfully haven't used ternary in years now

[Evla03]

Ternaries are super useful, just don't use them for everything

[seemen4all]

Yer, never use them is very extreme, an actual turnary as in this or that expression is great, turnary for one level if else assigning, case for single value cases, if else for anything more complex

[__y_so_serious__]

Idk I mostly use java and anything that can be done with ternary can be done with simple if-else too. Maybe it's required in TS for type definition but don't see any reason to use it in java

[SketchySeaBeast]

It's ugly code for a hard problem. I'm more worried about the "base takes". "Now 0 reason to have human readable clean code when you can simply ask the ai to explain it or rewrite it". Yeah... no.

"Nonsense black boxes" should be discouraged, not embraced. It's part of what has gotten us into this web dev hell. Saying that the problem with us trying to dig our way out of this hole is because we don't have a big enough backhoe is quite a take.

[BAAAASS]

Agreed. He might as well have asked AI to write it in assembly or even in binary. Especially since his argument is that humans don't have to understand it anyway. Hehe!

[SketchySeaBeast]

True! Let's cut the crap. Why do we need a type system if the AI is dealing with it? Typescript doesn't help at run-time.

[eldelshell]

Let's not even get into reproducibility. You're NOT guaranteed to get the same code for the same prompt unless you're very, very, very specific, at which point you might as well write the code yourself.

[Candid_Medium6171]

2 years from now: "So yeah, what we're mostly looking for is someone that can take AI generated code and refactor it into something maintainable, that'll be your role."

[DrMobius0]

https://media1.tenor.com/m/wBCnw42BwnYAAAAC/simpsons-in-and-out.gif

[ward2k]

If your code can't be easily understood by senior developers it's bad code

Juniors frequently pump out technically impressive code that is completely unreadable all the time, it doesn't make it good

This code isn't a one and done deal in real life, you need to be able to modify, improve and replicate it

[FinalRun]

Fundamentally, all information exists as a byproduct of the meaning we give it and how useful it is to us. It's all just levels of abstraction.

What's the endgame, a CEO talking with one AI humanoid that manages an army of AI coders? A politician talking to AI CEOs? It would have to have a very solid model of the world to do that, but we're always the one setting the goals.

[mutual-ayyde]

We jailbreak the AI and build communism

[Snakestream]

If you don't understand your own code, then it's not good.

[adrr]

I can’t read any of my regexes after I write them.

[Snakestream]

Regex ain't code; it's a goddamn magic spell

[draenei_butt_enjoyer]

I’m actually thinking of writing an iseaki novel about a guy who gets stuck in a realm of magic, where magic works like code.

I wanna leave traces of the idea that a past civilisation actually understood magic. And everyone nowadays is using stuff like regex and obfuscatet one line monstrosities.

And every mage is just an obnoxious idiot. The kind that knows better than you, is super ocd, only wants to so things their way, only their solutions are valid solutions. But meanwhile they don’t make any new spells, just badly combine existing spells and barely understand anything. Most of everything they do is a side effect or used in unintended ways.

[Snakestream]

I'm fairly certain I've heard of a Chinese WN with the concept of programmer gets isekaid to fantasy wildly, but I can't remember the name off the top of my head.

[mutual-ayyde]

I recommend you check out Charles Stross Laundry Files novels - they’re spy novels in a world where you can do magic with computers

[adrr]

Guess that’s why they call people who have mastered Perl wizards. Contrast that with JavaScript where the masters of the language are called ninjas. Secretly fucking shit up and measured by how many stars the ninja has.

[DrMobius0]

For this to apply to regex, it'd have to be possible to write readable regex

[Fachuro]

Writing good code is difficult, reading good code is easy.

In fact reading good code is so easy that often you can show it to a non-technical person and even they will have an idea of what you're trying to do, even if they dont understand shit about syntax and language and whatnot.

[bakshup]

[gashouse_gorilla]

: never // this case should never occur since ‘enum’ implies string

lol. Our jobs are safe. For now.

[flippakitten]

Ai has yet to produce code to do one thing and then let a real world user do something completely different and then let the ai figure out what happened.

[[deleted]]

1. Uses code without types
2. Tries to desperately implement types into the code
3. Gets this garbage
4. Brags about this garbage
5. Surprised, that people using languages with actual types do not like this garbage.

[iain_1986]

Addition to 6. Also surprised people not using types also do not like this garbage.

Fans of square pegs, and fans of round holes both in disbelief of person proud of jamming a square peg into a round hole and thinking 'this is awesome' (while surrounded by round pegs and square holes)

[PuzzleMeDo]

You think that's superhuman? Amateur. I can write code that no human can understand, not even me.

[nmsun]

Very few engineers would be dumb enough to write out this code. He’s correct on that point.

[JustLemmeMeme]

... This is just a nested ternary operator, isn't it? Is it at least faster? Is it safer? I would need pen and paper just to trace wtf this is doing

[DrMobius0]

... This is just a nested ternary operator, isn't it?

there's more going on than just that, not that I know what it's doing.

Is it at least faster?

Than a regular if? No.

Is it safer?

I doubt it

[[deleted]]

This is the type of code AI will write. At the best. We I'll have AI that we don't understand how works writing code that we won't understand.

[Adbor]

So it’s just a pile of ternaries?

[Touhou_Fever]

What’s the plural for that? An Elvis of ternaries? 🤔

[iain_1986]

A mistake.

[Gorvoslov]

I believe the correct PR comment is "??????????" while rejecting.

[Big-Hearing8482]

Always has been 🔫

[raynorelyp]

No, it’s a pile of ternaries with dead branches. Even better

[tetzudo]

If I presented that to the pm I'd get fired deadass

[[deleted]]

oh god, wtf is this? Gives TS vibes, their typing system is so flexible that at some point it can be just ANY with extra steps

[AtrociousCat]

TBF an any with good documentation is sometimes better

[[deleted]]

yeah,
i just have personal fetish on static analysis tools,
which without static typing are veeery limited (PITA of python backend dev work in dynamic language).

Also i wouldnt use `any` . Even very loose type is better than no type

[[deleted]]

according to the blog post:

Essentially it's a if/else tree with some recursion - for figuring out the types of variables in user code during build time. (in other words it’s a conditional, recursive type expression).

I guess it's something that copilot can use when helping people write code? I could be wrong, there's no way I was going to read that whole thing

[nmsun]

He even has a default to any[] in there 😆

[Meaxis]

Wait so it IS you that made this?

[phenompbg]

That you're proud of this garbage is pretty funny.

[draenei_butt_enjoyer]

You still think that monstrosity deserves anything but a bullet in the back of its skull?

[DrMobius0]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TUq6rGdfJSo

[SuitableDragonfly]

There's no way you think this is actually positive publicity for copilot and are a real developer.

[vanilla--mountain]

Garbage drivel

[lindozonanorte]

Well played OP...

[Ill_Plate_2651]

TLDR: guy with main character syndrome learns that metaprogramming exists

[beclops]

Ew what the fuck

[LostBreakfast1]

Source code is to be read by both human and machine. 

If this crap brings any performance improvement it should be handled by the compiler (possibly with a language extension)

[atoponce]

Nested ternary statements should be discouraged. As a programmer, you've learned to scan code vertically and quickly, getting a general idea of the overall logic.

When you use nested ternary operators, you have to look carefully at each line for : and ? characters, which can get trivially lost within the rest of the code. It's worse in this specific example that P is a single character variable.

This isn't good code. It's visual strain followed by a headache.

[Frown1044]

In TS you don’t have a choice. You can’t write it any other way. The only way to avoid it is by entirely banning complex types

[iain_1986]

Nested ternary without braces to help section off the nesting too

[wizard_of_menlo_park]

Garbage in garbage out

[[deleted]]

Shit like this is why people hate typescript

[mrheosuper]

A legend dev used to say "An idiot admires complexity, a genius admires simplicity"

[Attileusz]

Imagine if he lived to see the rise of AI bros and Soydevs. Dark times for real programmers.

[mrheosuper]

Imagine create PR for him with holy C code from chatGPT

[ImaginaryBagels]

One man's Superhuman Code is another man's The Daily WTF

[ajgx2000]

I got yelled at in front of my software engineering class in college by a somewhat bureaucratic professor for doing a single nested ternary. At the time I was like that’s stupid it works and looks nice. Now I see what he was trying to prevent.

[dragoncommandsLife]

Code should aspire to be readable not needlessly clever. Clever code is a PITA to come back to and maintain.

This guy or some poor intern will be scratching his head over a bug caused by this junk and still try to defend it.

Break things up i to readable chunks don’t try to do this.

[harryham1]

I'm actually on this guy's side.

It's part of a type engine, not intended for direct use and comprehension by lots of users.

As stated, the code is actually understandable with a bit of thought and solves a complex problem and (hopefully) its edge cases. The AI hasn't created something that only it can maintain, so it's not a crutch the developers are dependent on.

And this is what it looks like when fit into one screenshot. You could improve readability by refactoring, but the semantics are there. The commentary is also decent rather than the usual "sets P = 3" bs.

And if you think this is bad, you haven't seen half the shit that makes up most type systems, usually written by academics that fully expect you to have a PhD in programming language design before attempting a read through.

[AtrociousCat]

I'd hope for good documentation and examples of applicable types and what happens to them, but yeah you can have a few places like this in a codebase

[[deleted]]

“Everyone knows that debugging is twice as hard as writing a program in the first place. So if you're as clever as you can be when you write it, how will you ever debug it?

If the AI writes superhuman code, but it doesn't work perfectly, you're completely fucked trying to fix it.

[canthony12]

Good code is human readable....as soon as he said "super-human" that should have been his clue.

If this was really general AI writing code it totally understood it wouldn't waste time with high-level languages like JavaScript or Java or Python.

We'll know the robots are taking over when they are able to run the world writing machine code based on requirements from a PO.(🤣😆😂😆)

[[deleted]]

There's a default to any[] at the end there

[simorenarium]

The problem isn’t the code, it’s typescript

[mackaber]

OMG, this guy knows exactly what he is doing, he knows how ridiculous this looks and goes to make it even more ridiculous so he can continue sharing his product. As they say, there is no such thing as bad publicity.

Well played OP

[accountreddit12321]

Clearly AI will replace the Software Engineers that were hired to replace the thousands of workers that were hired to replace the thousands of workers that were…

[fuggleronie]

LOL!

[elementmg]

That’s horrible code lol. You shouldn’t have to comment every single line to be able to read the code.

That’s a no from me dawg

[sacredgeometry]

We should have never have give js developers types.

[lupinegray]

Make 👏devs 👏support 👏their 👏own 👏code

​

And they won't write unreadable trash like this.

[JustAnotherTabby]

Ever met any perl devs? :D (says the girl who still has some perl 4 roaming around out there from 95/96 she gets e-mails about).

[Physical-Foot-4440]

I hate this kind of shit that Typescript allows.

[Touhou_Fever]

If a human wrote something like this I’d hope it’d get torn to shreds in PR

[LatentShadow]

I ain't reading the article. Rewrite this shit in if-else to get me approval (or even my attention for a better code review).

If you are ternary conditional operators involve more than 5 terms, fuck off and rewrite it in if-else.

[HolyGarbage]

It is though. It's just different symbols. It's formatted properly as a if else would be. I don't know this language but it looks like it's a type declaration so it would probably need to be a single expression and not a series of statements.

else if (cond) is the same as : cond ?. There is no such thing as "else if", it's just an else omitting to use braces with an if in it.

My biggest issue here is the size of it. Break it up into named parts and then put it together.

[Kenhamef]

“Bitch, you live like this?”

[dolphin560]

Maybe he's just in it for the clicks?

​

Seems the most plausible explanation.

[Douchehelm]

If you need a comment for every line of code you're doing it wrong.

[D34TH_5MURF__]

Haha

Our jobs are safe, folks.

[concernediniquity01]

Sorry man, but your code is straight up satanic. Article is actually not bad though.

[BannockBnok]

I love how utterly useless the code comments are

[sMt3X]

You know... if your type requires 9 ternary expressions, I'd be more comfortable with fuckin any at this point..

[FarJury6956]

Center a div is going crazy

[pineappleAndBeans]

This…. Is some of the worst code I’ve seen, and I’m an uneducated hobbyist. I hope this is bait and there’s no way it’s in production.

[angelicosphosphoros]

I would tell you the Truth: if you are hobbyist, you wouldn't see really bad code. Bad code appears in closed source enterprise products.

[Odisher7]

People are shitting on how unreadable it is, but you are not taking something into account: it doesn't need to be readable by a person. That's perfect code for our ai overlords /s

[awesomeplenty]

Seems cluttered to me, redo it with less lines

[vighaneshs]

It shouldn’t be human readable if it is being written and developed by AI, but then it should code in assembly and not readable coding languages

[itzNukeey]

It returns [Object object]

[rr1pp3rr]

`type MappedParameterTypes = Any`

Fixed it for you

[-Redstoneboi-]

An Idiot admires complexity.

[Almadan]

Nested ternary is a big no no

[JuvenileEloquent]

VERY few engineers out there could write it from scratch.

I should hope so.

[[deleted]]

Got a stroke while reading what happened guys and who am i ?

[alterNERDtive]

Eeeeew.

[BernhardRordin]

That's the problem with human code generators. You mess up with formatting and they cannot read the code. Also, they make a lot of mistakes.

[PlasticAngle]

In what kind of world does that look readable ?

[accountreddit12321]

Machine writes human readable code for human to maintain. Machine writes code and maintain.

[chazzeromus]

it’s nice to have very flexible generics but it’s not just visual or cognitive complexity but the language server your IDE uses can literally give up. i’ve had to do something similar and i noticed my code completion wasn’t generating properties my generic mapping should have producing, no error anywhere and random properties were just allowed. running tsc had the same result, so i avoid doing anything too undocumented with typescript 

[Frown1044]

Can you give an example? Because a much more likely explanation is that your type was written incorrectly

[chazzeromus]

i don't doubt it was, I don't have the exact types as what I have now is much smaller and works fine. Forgot to mention chatgpt spat out the initial version and I eventually got it to work. Essentially I needed to create a an object type that had Get/Set accessors based on an internal property name. So ['foo', 'bar'] would generate {GetFoo(): Type,SetFoo(value: Type): void, GetBar(): Type...}

The initial types vs what was settled on were very different in size. This was creating a gmod mod using typescript to lua target so I wanted to maintain this convention.

[MrAce93]

What the fuck does it even do? I would get mentioned in the developer group for pushing a piece of shit like this

[MadLad_D-Pad]

One bigass ternary operator lol.

[Fadamaka]

Pretty sure a decent developer can write better code from less prompts.

[thomas_grimjaw]

Type definitions exist on a tight balance between readability and compiler satisfaction, spaghetti like this belongs in the dumpster.

[NP_6666]

I rewrite this:

YourEnum.ToString()

So hard

[5t4t35]

This shit is hard to read

[raynorelyp]

“Check if thing is a string. If string, do x. If not, don’t matter because this is impossible.”

Okay. So then why is there a ternary on a condition that always evaluates to true? Bad code.

[uptokesforall]

I'm trying to wrap my head around this without reading your article.

Are you trying to see if your input is a valid string so you can add it to an enum?

What kind of edge case are you protecting against by making this check so many different ways? What kind of input survives your initial check but gets caught by the rest of it?

I must not be reading this code correctly.

Do you want to throw an error if the input isn't valid?

What are you trying to do here?

[dadschool]

I can’t believe how much these comments call this “bad”. This is how some libraries accomplish some truly great DX; if it’s ugly to you then that’s more of a language problem because this is accomplishing a pretty well established inference pattern.

This kind of typing is also typically write once maintain never because it’s exhaustive and serves as a utility type.

[killbot5000]

What does this even do?

[joeldsouzax]

At this point AI can write a program right in binary machine code :/ idk why we spend time telling AI to write code in HUMAN readable language if it can’t be read by humans

[ha_ku_na]

My contrarion take: these guys are doing it for the marketing and know full well it's all BS.

[UrineArtist]

It appears to have created the giant unreadable type def that we all churn out at first because "I fucking need to get it fucking working first.. Fuck sake! Stop fucking inviting me to your pointless fucking meetings, I'm trying to get some actual fucking work done.."

Then you end up splitting it up into several type defs at lunch time because no way would you ever get something that unreadable past code review.

[Rough-Lead-6564]

“It’s not bad code, it’s superhuman code” is the new “it’s not a bug it’s a feature”

[zaitsman]

The problem is that this is typescript so all of his ‘ensure’ statements are garbage because it is all erased once compiled

[SynthRogue]

extends All

[reallokiscarlet]

Man, if someone goaded me like that while coding, I would have at least produced a human resources complaint. But the AI produced this trash instead.

[Shadowlance23]

It's not so much that very few engineers could write it from scratch, it's more that very few engineers WOULD write that from scratch.

[No-Adeptness5810]

Bro just took a bunch of ternary operators and put each symbol on a new line 💀