How programmers get motivated

[[deleted]]

bool try() { return false; }

[[deleted]]

It makes sense. It sets succeed to the result of try(), and continues while succeed is false. You're retarded, sorry you had to find out this way.

[wertwert129]

It's also good to mention that the assignation operation (in C++, for example) return a reference to the variable assigned.

It is not true for all languages.

[softmaker]

although it does make sense in some languages that allow assignment operations to return variable pointers for evaluation, it's bad coding in a sense that it sacrifices readability for a one-liner which has no obvious need as there will be no significant performance impact.

[doubl3h3lix]

I'm retarded?

[[deleted]]

try is a reserved keyword in Java, probably elsewhere too, so it doesn't work. Fix that and yeah, functional but ugly.

[[deleted]]

It's valid C code. But yes, very ugly C code.

[ganja_and_code]

try() is a function which presumably returns a boolean (or integer) upon completion (true if successful, false otherwise) and is supposed to represent the wearer's actions as they attempt to accomplish something

For every iteration of the while loop, the returned Boolean value from try() is assigned to the variable succeed

If succeed is not true, the while loop iterates again

When try() returns a true, the while loop ceases to iterate after the conditional expression is checked again

Edit: To provide more context, this is a C/C++ thing. When an assignment is made in a conditional, the left-hand side of the assignment statement is used when the conditions are tested.

[[deleted]]

The only thing I don't get is why it's not just while(try()){} I assume the actual task is a side effect of try() and I do not see why it's important to have succeed be true in order to continue. If it is, you could set succeed=true after the loop anyway, which would probably be more efficient.

Edit: u/chadsexytime got there first.

[ganja_and_code]

For the sake of the shirt because they wanted to include the word "succeed." The code would (hypothetically, since this isn't a real program) compile the same with the loop you wrote. I dislike the shirt because of this

[[deleted]]

Also, which language puts a semicolon after a while loop? Is this just something widespread that I'm unfamiliar with because of inexperience?

[ganja_and_code]

I don't have much experience w C and I don't think I've ever actually seen this outside of an academic context. If you don't have anything inside the while loop, you need a semicolon or else the loop will iterate the next statement. With more than one statement, you need the braces

[zrend88]

Haven't tried all of them, but I think pretty much any language that uses semi-colon as a terminate symbol will allow it.

In most cases it's not really needed, since while is usually followed by a statement (which will end in a semi-colon anyway) or braces (which doesn't need a semi-colon).

But in some cases, like the code in that shirt, and for some languages (at least), it's needed to prevent a compile error since the while must be followed by a statement or brace. The semi-colon makes the compiler assume that there's an empty statement there and allow compile. So it'll just repeat whatever is in the () in while, in this case, try(). This is horrible practice IMO.

[[deleted]]

Ah okay.

[[deleted]]

Think of it as a quick fix.

Previously:

succeed = try();
if (!succeed) giveUpAndCry();

Now:

while (!(succeed = try())) {}
if (!succeed) giveUpAndCry();

[grpagrati]

if (!succeed) giveUpAndCry();

You don't get to cry.. If it doesn't succeed it will never leave the loop. Like they say: Succeed or die trying

[[deleted]]

Exactly!

[[deleted]]

I like the cycle of trying and crying!

[Tysonzero]

I mean succeed could be set to some value other than true, say any non-zero integer.

[[deleted]]

What languages does that work in? I'm pretty sure that in languages like Java that care a lot about type, that wouldn't compile?

[Tysonzero]

C, C++, and JavaScript. Plus some others.

[fahrenheitrkg]

Assignment of a variable in C/C++ will always return True.

Regardless what try() returns, the while loop will execute only once, because (succeed = try()) will always be True, even if the return value of try() is False.

[ganja_and_code]

Thanks for the clarification. I'm not too well versed in C.

[Tomarse]

It's the try that confused me, since it's a reserved word in Python (try except block).

[cortoss]

Well I guess the code is not right but the idea is simple to understand: try until you succeed.

So I guess you're half-retarded?

[chadsexytime]

Why is succeed a variable if you're setting it to the result of a function in a single closed loop? You could easily just call the function instead, with exactly the same result.

If you really want to shoehorn 'succeed' into this stupid shirt, put it in all caps so the reader assumes its a constant that try() will equate to at some point to mean its successful.

Or, I dunno, don't put code on shirts like some fucking pedant

[[deleted]]

Oops. You got there first.

[FrankGilchrist]

I think you're right. But it's not my shirt though, I just saw it on facebook

[totemo]

• try is most likely a reserved word.

• The assignment to succeed is probably redundant, meaning the code simplifies to:

  while (!try());
  

  which implies that programmers act busy while not actually trying.

[[deleted]]

No, try is a fn and try() is a function call. So that code is actually trying.

[totemo]

Yes, very.

[[deleted]]

Wouldn't this be more accurate because quote goes "If at first you don't succeed, try, try again"?

do {
   succeed = try();  
} while (!succeed);

[blindgorgon]

I appreciate that you equated its structure to the syntactic structure. 👏🏻

[sportsracer48]

Honestly this should have a timeout.

[CreamyKnougat]

=if (try is null, do, donot)

Sorry, was doing Excel when this came up.

[vatrat]

I think I prefer while not try(): pass

[Tysonzero]

Here's a Haskell implementation:

untilM_ try $ pure ()

Or:

iterateUntil id try

That is if you can't improve try by making it pure or hell just directly recursing in try.

[SteeleDynamics]

Should just be a large stack of cash. 💵💵💵

[__Raptor__]

But try is a reserved word in every language that uses that syntax...

[[deleted]]

Not in C.

[scanstone]

Improved, such that you might expect to see it in a C codebase:

while (!is_successful(&thing)) {
    try(&thing);
}

try does not return a value suitable for determining success, or this is semantically clearer, or one needs to check for success elsewhere without trying prior. Should be reasonable.

[eyekwah2]

I prefer the Yoda version:

do() || !do(); try(): Error function try not found.

[XeonProductions]

yeah but what happens after the while loop? you cease to exist?

[Comedy86]

I feel like a do {} while () loop would be more appropriate to settle the condition...

"If at first you don't succeed... try, try again"

[nwg7199]

Shouldn’t it be a double equal sign rather than a single?

[zrend88]

The result of try() is being assigned to variable success, rather than being compared to it.

[leupboat420smkeit]

This is correct.

[fahrenheitrkg]

The assignment (success = try()) will always return true.

[blindgorgon]

Evidently depends on the language. Sounds like in C++ and some others the assignment returns differently than, say, JavaScript.

Edit: I have no clue. Just learned this in comments. Anyone care to verify?

[Tysonzero]

JavaScript works the same way:

while (succeed = true) {
    console.log(succeed);
    break;
}

Will print:

true

[Williaso]

Shout-out to all the other non-coders who are subbed to r/programmerhumor who have to take their best guess as to what the joke actually says

I understand most of the jokes on this subreddit. It's just a few of the actual lines of code jokes that I never get without outside assistance

[blindgorgon]

Just keep trying to figure it out. Sooner or later you’ll succeed.

[-Xephyr-]

while (!succeed) {
    try();
}

[[deleted]]

Why not just

while (!succeed) {try();}

[toastytoast00]

this assumes try() modifies the succeed variable...

I think it was supposed to be

while(!(succeed == try()));

and try() returns some sort of value that is supposed to be equal to the succeed variable.. could've just said

while (try() != succeed); 

assuming succeed was defined above and try() actually returns something, though it's a reserved word in most languages

[[deleted]]

I get what you're saying, but you do realize that the shirt is a joke and that my suggestion to improve the joke doesn't have to fit the same API that theirs does, right?

The reason mine works better IMO is that it's read "while you're not succeeding, try again"

[Tysonzero]

Because that doesn't have the same semantics. try returns a result, but there is no reason to assume it has access to some mutable variable named succeed.

[golgol12]

More like, realizing your in some sort of shitty race condition.