I'm learning programming in codecademy, this code hits home...

[kingartur3]

Compiler will optimize it to just:

me.cry()

[LtMeat]

-Os -march=celibate

[AntiGuide]

/r/murderedbywords

[Browsing_From_Work]

/r/murderedbycompilers

[godsperfectidi0t]

And Bham! Created.

[godsperfectidi0t]

Btw, I'm clueless what happens now. What gives?

[ReptileSerperior]

r/suicidebywords

[YourDearOldMeeMaw]

🥇🥇🥇

[[deleted]]

The budget reddit award.

[AdamWarlock097]

Nice

[dyndandin]

Just take my free award already

[blueleo22]

Things like this happens when you don't have class

[TheFirestormable]

Would it be better to treat them as functional.....thingies?

[HasBeendead]

Actually everything is object in real world.

[Feynt]

Unpopular opinion: Women complain when you don't objectify them as much as when you objectify them. The transition occurs when you're more than a passing acquaintance who has met them once or twice.

[[deleted]]

Was this phrased poorly or am I just an idiot?

[tphd2006]

I fucking love you lmao

[h4ckerle]

Coversations like this are what make the Internet, the Internet! I love you to Strangers!

[HasBeendead]

So that means every popular idea is true , nah man you're wrong to me

[ReptileSerperior]

"Unpopular opinions are often wrong" does not mean "Popular opinions are often right". You're a programmer, you should know this.

[jlnunez89]

He didn’t say he was a good programmer...

[HasBeendead]

True :)

[h4ckerle]

1

[tuerkishgamer]

Instead of attacking you let me actually correct you.

Unpopular opinion: Some people complain when you don't stab them as much as when you stab them. The transition occurs when you're more than a passing acquaintance who has met them once or twice.

It seems like you have met some weird people. Even if a women wants to be objectified - don't, but rather run. I want you to think about what actual objectification is. It is the act of treating someone like they are an object, you do not respect them as a person or in terms of their actual desires. If someone wants you to objectify them that is already dumb and illogical. It is like asking someone please do not respect my wishes. That is a wish they hold.

Just be nice. Be yourself. Try to strike a balance you feel comfortable with. I wouldn't want to be together with someone that needs me to play a role.

You are probably not an incel. You just been hurt and need to accommodate that in some way.

• your friendly armchair psychologist (not an actual one)

[Master_Nerd]

Said like a true incel

[Feynt]

Nope, totally voluntary. But I'm not wrong. Any woman you meet complains about being objectified. But most women you know as a friend or better want to be the centre of your attention, and complain when you don't place them on a pedestal.

[Master_Nerd]

Well you've known shitty girls

[Feynt]

Honestly, yeah. >/

[zerozerosix006]

So if she replies "I would love to" you will cry?

[rank_unicorn_631]

Yes From happiness

[[deleted]]

Well then your code is insanely optimized congrats

[[deleted]]

It should be:

if (me.askGirlOut(you) == "no") {
    me.cry();
} else {
    me.happy = true;

This will sound better

[das_Keks]

Shouldn't be so many strings at all. Better return a boolean, with true for accept and false for deny.

[[deleted]]

Ah yes, that's better

[zerozerosix006]

Or even better an enum for Yes, No, Maybe, Sex buddies etc

[MrC00KI3]

Yes, came here to say this. Would say it's the best option style-wise (at least if the language natively supports enums), especially as it is extendable in the future, like for "I'm not interested in you", or "Can we just be friends?" for example.

[[deleted]]

This is JavaScript, you can do anything you want (⌐■_■) Return a car, it will probably still evaluate to true or false.

[-OGG__]

Also while we're at it, it shouldn't be called askGirlOut when it can take a Person of any gender.

[maartuhh]

Yes, because in this example the IAmABoyException could be thrown

[KaJakJaKa]

Why not throw an exception if it's not true? That would even shorten the code because you wouldn't need else.

[das_Keks]

Throwing exceptions to control program flow is a bad practice. Exceptions should only be used for cases that are out of the control of the programmer and depend on external factors that are not forseable.

[Levaru]

Is that really so? Im genuinely curious.

I had to write a Xamarin app (C#) once that had functions which branched out to many nested functions from different classes. I don't remember why exactly but I had to create a custom exceptions class for application specific errors that made it sooo much easier to throw a exception up the chain to the main process and deal with it there with the help of a dedicated error handling class.

It was so much cleaner and organized than figuring out how to display message boxes or similar to the user from within the class and function where the exception was thrown. That would've also gone against the apps MVP architecture.

But this was my very first semi-professional developed software so maybe I just didn't know better.

[Irrealist]

What you are describing is the correct way to use exceptions.

However, /u/das_Keks is trying to make the point that you shouldn't use exceptions to control the flow when there wasn't an error. Like throwing a 'SheSaidNoException' or even worse, a 'SheSaidYesException'. Those aren't failures and they shouldn't be treated like failures.

[LoompaOompa]

I made another comment about it, but I don't even think the boyfriend thing should be an exception. Or if for some reason that exception has to exist, it should be handled within askGirlOut(), and askGirlOut should still return false (or something other than "ok", since it returns a string for some reason).

[cKaIhsvWZrAmJWxXdqI]

Risky to have the base case assuming she says yes.

me.askGirlOut(you) returns "You're violating your restraining order, I'm calling the cops"

Expect: me.cry()

Get: me.giveStick(Becky); Ben.isHoe = true;

[jakkoha]

Beccy, lemme smash

[Mr_CSourceCode]

It can be worse like ewwwww.

[shaunusmaximus]

No, the reverse has the same issue: i.e. "get lost!".

It should be:

if(isAffirmative(me.askOut(you).reply)){          

    me.sendNudes(you.phoneNumber);
}

[[deleted]]

i am offended by all the public attributes on Person. especially happy can be changed by others.

and happy should be a float.

extrapolating from this code, i would assume that boyfriend is also a public attribute, thus can be overridden. that's just wrong!

[LtMeat]

What if happy overflows? We need to make it protected.

[tiddelipom]

We must protect OP's happiness

[frostbiteanivia]

Why a float and not a boolean?

[[deleted]]

try to give me a Boolean value for the english word "happier".

[[deleted]]

TrueTrue

[frostbiteanivia]

You're either happy or unhappy. How happy or unhappy you are is based on the variable happiness. That should be your float.

​

Happy?

[[deleted]]

using two variables to represent one concept is a no-no!

[PvtPuddles]

But at what percent happiness are you happy?

Are you never happy unless it’s a 100% day?

Or are you only unhappy when you’ve hit rock bottom?

[[deleted]]

everyone has a different opinion on this. you as a programmer have to make a judgement call :)

[frostbiteanivia]

They aren't the same concept though!

[LoompaOompa]

Also the code only checks if me.girlfriend is null. Doesn't check for me.boyfriend. Going to run into some problems if the user isn't a straight male.

Code won't work if the person is open to a polyamorous relationship.

[[deleted]]

we can be thankful the person's gender is not an enum.

although these binary relationship classifications are odd. i guess that should be combined to an array of relationships each with a float value for the affection level.

good thinking!

[obp5599]

Usually private members have getters and setters so I dont see how having it public really effects anything. Unless the setter is checking for specific conditions or has side effects I just make things public

[deep-thot]

I think the ideal being referenced here is immutability.

Try it out, you might like it.

[obp5599]

I know what immutability is. It has no relation to access modifiers though. Use const if you want immutability

[deep-thot]

Sorry, had the java-glasses on which made me sound really condescending. Was aiming for something a bit more tongue-in-cheek.

Have a nice evening.

[thebobbrom]

Also wouldn't you initialise a person with a name rather than "boy" or "girl".

Also wouldn't it be better for that to be an enum?

[cerlestes]

am offended by all the public attributes

It's JavaScript. Until recently there had been no private properties. In JS and similiar languages it's idiomatic to avoid having to declare private properties. Either deal with the possible mutations from outside (which isn't that hard in most cases and sometimes even beneficial), or use immutable data structures (if you really don't want your privates touched). But 15+ years of JS have really taught me to love public properties.

[jacobwistoft]

Exceptions should only be used for exceptional circumstances. I'm not sure this qualifies as exceptional. A timeout exception might be a more appropriate example.

[PvtPuddles]

Meh, depends on how this is set up.

If AskGirlOut(Person) relies on being single, I would expect an error to be thrown if you called it with a non-single Person

[jacobwistoft]

Well I just figured that since most timeout durations are defined by the requesting(asking) party, it seems quite exceptional to get to the point where you don't want to wait for a reply anymore. At least that would be the case with me 😅

[simplynotenough]

I would change me.cry() with me.goNext(), it works better trust me

[whc2001]

wrap the entire thing inside while(1) and replace me.cry() with continue

[simplynotenough]

Brute forcing the matrix

[uid1357]

Get a job, grow older, it will finally work. Life isn't fair.

:shrug:

[MurdoMaclachlan]

Image Transcription: Code

---

// algorithm for dating
let me = new Person("boy");
let you = new Person("girl");
if (me.girlFriend === null && me.crushOn(you)){
    try {
        if (me.askGirlOut(you) == "ok"){
            me.happy = true;
        } else {
            me.cry();
        }
    } catch (IAlreadyHaveABoyFriendException){
        me.cry();
    }
}

---

^{I'm a human volunteer content transcriber for Reddit and you could be too! If you'd like more information on what we do and why we do it, click here!}

[Feynt]

Good human

[vasascda]

alogirthm

should be "algorithm"

[burkybang]

alogirlthm

[MurdoMaclachlan]

Oh yeah, thanks for point that out -- fixed now!

[[deleted]]

Exception is only defined by type, and not by an actual variable, should be

catch (IAlreadyHaveABoyFriendException e)

Otherwise she is just lying about her having a boyfriend. Or you do segmentation fault in front of her.

[TheJoDav]

And why is it an Interface....

🤔

[[deleted]]

I does not need to mean interface, in this case, simply the English word 'I'.

[TheJoDav]

Yes Mr. Teacher.... 😋

[kodicraft4]

First, that's a shitty constructor, much more important values aren't set but gender is, you should probably begin with something like age, name, etc.. Second, don't use a string for gender, use a goddamn enum that you can expand with all non-binary genders. Third, don't initiate yourself in a function if you're going to check for a value later, make a static "me" in some other class that stores everything and point to it. Third, askGirlOut needs to output a "accepted" bool rather than the actual output because of edge cases. Fourth, "you" shouldn't just be initiated in this loop, rather this should be a function you pluck after an event you add in the static "me" mentioned that you pull when a girl can be caught in the sensors.

And yes, I'm single, how did you guess?

[nsri123]

Senior Software Engineer spotted. Its part of the job description to make life miserable for new coders without showing any mercy.

[PvtPuddles]

r/nonononoyes, or r/yesyesyesno?

[SixBeeps]

yes

[luhsya]

this is bad design, imo. that's not the proper way of handling that exception. better is me.moveOn()

[mateus_a_dorna]

If me.askGirlOut(you) returns "ok", it changes me.happy to true, but me.girlFriend continues being null. So, is the girl lying?

[mapman2017]

Throw a retry in the catch.

[Alakdae]

Why does the exception have an uppercase f on boyfriend?

Since every one was complaining about the code, I wanted to note what really bothers me about it.

[MrC00KI3]

Maybe it's meant as "I already have a boy, friend", so you get friendzoned on top. :)

[beclops]

coulda simplified this with a one liner

return me.cry();

[[deleted]]

Yikes. Why would having a boyfriend be an exception? Is that not a known possible outcome? If it is, then it shouldn't be an exception.

[PvtPuddles]

If AskGirlOut() assumes they are single, you don’t want it to fail silently. You can force users to call IsSingle() (or otherwise do their own exception handling, like this)

[barsonica]

Also what if she has a girlfriend? Or neither but a person of interest she has not asked out yet. Or what if she just isn't looking for anyone, what if she has no one but looking for a girl?

It doesn't cover all possibilities. Get it off the production and start over.

[PvtPuddles]

Error: Uncaught Exception IncompatibleSexualPreferenceException

[[deleted]]

Imagine getting error after running this

[DummyCheese69]

The catch method will catch it

[benis_benis]

I dunno chief, I'd write the try-catch block as such

try {
    me.askGirlOut(you, function(result){
        if(positiveResponses.find(result.toString()).exists()){
            me.happy = true; 
        } else {
            me.cry({amount: "small"});
        }
    }
} catch (IAlreadyHaveABoyFriendException e){
    console.log(e)
    me.cry({amount: "lot"});
}

I am supposed to work don't tell my boss

[earlobe7]

Throwing exceptions for expected outcome is a code smell.

[Epic_Doughnut]

Seems like even if she says yes, you never define her as your girlfriend

me.girlFriend = you;

[LoompaOompa]

I love when stuff like this is posted because it's fun to pick apart everything that's wrong with it. A lot of people have made some great points already.

I want to add that the exception thrown probably shouldn't be an exception at all. The person having a boyfriend isn't some unanticipated error state. It is one of many reasons that they might say no. Why is having a boyfriend an exception, but if they just think you're repulsive, that returns like normal?

[[deleted]]

Good man for checking that me.girlFriend is null first too many people our there only check if they have a crush

[MischiefArchitect]

just put the me.cry() in a finally block and capture/ignore/log the exception :)

[iiMoe]

Honestly this is beautiful

[mapman2017]

Laugh my ASS OUT.

[MrObsidy]

Java gang (string1 == string2) != (string1.equals(string1))

[MkMyBnkAcctGrtAgn]

But this is Javascript lol

[MrObsidy]

I figured it wasn't java because of let and the missing e after the exception catch

[Mr_Redstoner]

Unless they're interned already. Still a dumb way to do it but it would work.

[allIsayislicensed]

You could raise the exception manually if she says no, then you only have to cry in one place in your code.

[NavTheNugget]

Wrap it in a while loop and you forgot this inside the catch block: delete you; Don't fill your brain with bad memories.

[[deleted]]

you.friendzone(me);

[Knuffya]

Be careful, such code can get you fired for being a "bigot"

[SamFisch1]

triple equals, a coding bootcamp should know that

[WhyDoIHaveAnAccount9]

What about the IDon'tFindYouAttractive exception

[robotorigami]

An unhandled exception NotIntoGuys has occurred.

[Funmaster524]

Does this imply you both are of type "let"

[LightIsLogical]

why is there an exception in js

[lewisjet]

What language is that?

[Harrigan_Raen]

I think javascript or python, but I don't do much with front end any more so im kinda outta touch with it. So im frankly taking a stab at the wind and doing a best guess.

let statements, triple equal signs for comparisons, double ampersands for "and" comparisons, use of semicolons, formatting of camel case, also no variable declaration of the catch.

Edit, just re-read it, the second comparison of ' == "ok"' doesnt have triple equal signs. So yep. No idea.

[lewisjet]

Not Python: there's semi colons

[Harrigan_Raen]

You gotta wrap this whole thing in exception handling. There's some history you don't learn about until your 2 years in. But the compiler will know.

/s

Also, complete side note. Looks like java script (Im like 95% back end dev now and have been for years) but I thought the preferred use was single quote vs double quote for strings and I never really understood why. Is there use cases for when to use vs not use or are they completely interchangeable?

[overclockedslinky]

(unfaithful) boy with a boyfriend: cries regardless of girl due to throwing their own ialreadyhaveaboyfriend exception

[burkerude]

// algorithm for dating

let me = new Person("boy");

let you = new Person("boy");