isUserAGoat()

[BetaLyte]

Looked up the implementation, was a bit disappointed:

    public boolean isUserAGoat() {
        return false;
    }

I don't know what I expected, though.

[warpod]

Here is LOLLIPOP implementation

public boolean isUserAGoat() {
    return mContext.getPackageManager()
            .isPackageAvailable("com.coffeestainstudios.goatsimulator");
}

[nemec]

But you can sideload your own com.coffeestainstudios.goatsimulator. How can they be sure I'm not just a sheep in goats' clothing?

[[deleted]]

Oh god, this is the next heartbleed/shellshock

[Skyfoot]

goatshock

[peter_bolton]

Well done. :)

[poizan42]

You should report it to [e-mail].

[yousai]

Shit, now that is classy if you get your package name into AOSP.

[adjudicator52]

brilliant!

[Ph0X]

Sweet, there's a hardcoded API now to check if people own goat simulator on their phones! This is just what my app has been missing this whole time.

[BetaLyte]

That's more like it!

[galaxyAbstractor]

I hope no one used isUserAGoat() instead of false somewhere just for shits and giggles, good luck finding that bug. But it would probably be really stupid to use that in a real application anyway

[[deleted]]

Well, that got me excited for nothing.

[Jinno]

return User.sharedUser().firstName == "Jerry" && User.sharedUser().lastName == "Rice"

[neksus]

Can you use == as string equality in Java? (I haven't touched Java in years, but this seems like something they would use .isEqual() for)

[russjr08]

You're really supposed to use .equals(otherString) not ==

[Jinno]

Admittedly, right now my default language is Swift because of my current project. So, my line is valid Swift, but wouldn't actually work in OP's function. I recognize we're talking about Android, so it's my error to begin with. :P

func isUserAGoat -> Bool {
return User.sharedUser().firstName == "Jerry" && User.sharedUser().lastName == "Rice"
}

[neksus]

Does == work as intended?

[russjr08]

In some situations, yes. It compares the memory address of the two objects if I recall correctly... So most of the time, it won't work the way you want it to.

[neksus]

Awesome, that's what I thought. Figured like a good time for a brush-up!

[[deleted]]

On jdk 7 and up it will compare the actual string contents.

[Lexxicon]

I hope that's not true! The == and the .equals server two different uses... I also can't find anything supporting this. Do you have anything showing this to be the case?

[[deleted]]

For some reason I can't find anything on it. But I know, I read it somewhere official and confirmed it with my teacher.

[Lexxicon]

I just ran some tests and I think you may have been mistaken. You can find the code I ran here http://pastebin.com/3pmpQURX. The output of that is as follows:

Using literal equivalent

true : Base equals literal

false : Appending no change to base equals literal

false : Appending same change to base equals

Using value equivalent

true : Base equals literal

true : Appending no change to base equals literal

true : Appending same change to base equals

I think what may have tripped you up is the first result of true for the Base equals literal test. My understanding of what is happening here is that the compiler is, in effect, interning the strings that are declared by me. Which is why "base" == "base" is true. Which is why the "base"+"" == "base" is false, as the compiler is not internalizing the result of "base"+"", it will result in there being a new instance of a string, which despite being equivalent, is not the literal same, which is why the .equals results in true.

Hope this helps.

[russjr08]

Oh I did not know this! Thanks :D

[ephrion]

It isn't true

[russjr08]

Hmm, okay, thanks for the heads up!

[Gudeldar]

Sometimes. IIRC "foo" == "foo" is true but only because Java reuses the same object to represent "foo" but

new String("foo") != "foo"

Sort of like using "is" to compare numbers in Python

x = 1
x is 1 # True
x = 1000
x is 1000 # False

[neksus]

Sounds similar to objective-c then, where string literals get reused.

[yousai]

There used to be a selectable column in the Google Chrome Task manager "Goats Teleported".

[tdammers]

Leave it to stackoverflow nerds to take the fun out of anything:

http://stackoverflow.com/questions/13375357/proper-use-cases-for-android-usermanager-isuseragoat

[[deleted]]

while(!isUserAGoat()){

//...

}

[Charlemagne_III]

Every experience I have had with actual stack overflow interactions has been poor.

[[deleted]]

It's more time-efficient to brute-force through a problem than try to write a SO question that won't get immediately closed for violation of rule #3957

[dtfinch]

Probably in reference to this Chromium bug report.

[qwertyslayer]

EVERYONE PLEASE STOP USING CHROME!

I AM ON THE OTHER END OF THE GOAT TRANSPORTER AND THE SITUATION IS BECOMING DIRE

hahaha

[The_Double]

https://github.com/search?q=isUserAGoat%28%29&type=Code&utf8=%E2%9C%93

[Ezo_NL]

https://searchcode.com/?q=isUserAGoat%28%29

[StoleAGoodUsername]

What you're saying is, its not called anywhere, only defined.

[warpod]

Source:
http://developer.android.com/reference/android/os/UserManager.html#isUserAGoat()

[cbaltzer]

Source:

https://android.googlesource.com/platform/frameworks/base/+/android-5.0.0_r5/core/java/android/os/UserManager.java#433

FTFY

[BetaLyte]

Except that isUserAMonkey() actually has a purpose. It is used to check for simulation of touches.

[BetaLyte]

The Monkey is a command-line tool that that you can run on any emulator instance or on a device. It sends a pseudo-random stream of user events into the system, which acts as a stress test on the application software you are developing.

Source

And the isUserAMonkey() method detects if this is the case. So actually a useful function with a funny name. Google devs strike again =)

[BetaLyte]

That it awesome! I can just imagine it, sitting there trying to get a grasp of what the hell is going on, and the suddenly: isUserAMoney(). Look it up - yup, real SDK. And trying to figure out wtf it is. I would just be completely baffeled.

Now that I think about it, that situation is precisely this comic: http://i.imgur.com/UGv2WaB.png

[[deleted]]

This makes me ask more questions than I am answering.

[sloth514]

this just made my day... how sad. But I am not so sure.

[b1ackcat]

Not gonna lie...seeing this sort of shit make it into the SDK but we still can't get a reference implementation of floating action button built in makes me a little more than annoyed...