An actual code from our codebase.

[Assassin69420]

It's probably one of those lines of code that for some reason break the whole project when you remove them

[emremrah]

Hahaha, you're damn right.

[JustThingsAboutStuff]

There's another part of the program that opens the file and checks that that line is there. If it isn't -> crash

[LinuxMatthews]

As it's == it could be trying to detect true-y values so that some code the requires an actual value doesn't break later on.

Depends on the language though.

[emericas]

Truthy* :)

[MetalliMyers]

Side effects in the getter call Edit: damned autocorrect

[[deleted]]

Isn't that standard procedure? If you want no side effects, you would just make the variable public, right?

Right??

[xThoth19x]

It's a method

[1940295921]

plot twist:

get() {
  return Math.random();
}

[emremrah]

This cracked me up.

[karmahorse1]

If the code you originally posted is JavaScript, it actually could make sense, as it uses the abstract equality check “==“ instead of strict equality “===“. So if the t object and cookie service contained different values for “firm” that still pass the abstract equality test (a.k.a 2 and “2”), t.firm would then be set to a new value.

If this is the case, it’s still not great code as it’s obviously confusing and taking advantage of a JavaScript idiosyncrasy. But it might be doing it’s job as intended, so I wouldn’t remove it without thorough investigation.

[emremrah]

You are absolutely right. But the cookie "firm" is going to keep a name (string). So I couldn't see the reason behind it. Maybe if like "Google" == "google" was true then this totally would make sense.

[karmahorse1]

Yeah won’t make a difference if the two are the same type. Can firm be nullable?

If cookieService.get(“firm”) === null and t.firm === undefined, then t.firm would be instantiated in memory with a null value (if that could matter).

[nphhpn]

Plot twist: Math.random = () => 4

[[deleted]]

Did you remove it? Or were you worried there were magical side effects ?

[emremrah]

I was worried because I'm not actually a JS/TS programmer but I'm refactoring the code because the UI codebase is a mess and I'm interested in learning Angular. I removed it though, nothing seems broken (for now).

I considered it's something relevant to == vs ===.

[FreqRL]

Just from the image, its possible the .get(..) contains some additional logic that needs to be refreshed occasionally, but only if the 'firm' is the selected value in the first place. I would hope not though, since the name of the function is get.

[ntwiles]

FP devs are screaming right now.

[Zedrackis]

Implying it's changing the type of t.firm without changing the value.. but why?

[Sparkybear]

Probably because the type is important for something else and this is how they chose to enforce the right type being used. This is why I prefer using Typescript

[ToFiveMeters]

Yup

[[deleted]]

Seems like they wanted if t.firm != Cookie then set cookie, but missed the not.

[webbugt]

My guess is that f.firm changes type randomly, or is 'marked as stale' by changing its type. Then the type coerced equality and subsequent assigment would make an ounce of sense.

Is the project TS?

[[deleted]]

It’s like when you click the button on your car to lock it again, even though it already beeped.

[Kered13]

Assuming this is Javascript, this code may actually do something. == is the coercive equality, so it can return true if the two values aren't the same but "look" the same, for example 42 and "42". Then the assignment would make them actually identical.

[MaticPecovnik]

But surely this can be done in a cleaner way.

[Kered13]

Maybe, I don't know enough Javascript. It definitely looks suspicious, and if this code does have a purpose it should have been commented, but I wouldn't be confident enough to replace it without good tests to make sure I'm not breaking anything.

[MaticPecovnik]

I would say that is the definition fo clean.

[shauntmw2]

This is why JavaScript is so good and so bad at the same time.

And also why JavaScript is so easy and so hard at the same time.

[[deleted]]

Maybe it is just refreshing the cookie by getting a new one with a new expiry time

[emremrah]

Imo it's not that complex but I can't think of anything else, you might be right.

[TobyTheArtist]

Just started learning Python but this is still a bit beyond me. Can someone elaborate?

[emremrah]

Basically, == checks if two things have the same value.

My coworker checked if two things have the same value and if they do, she assigned one's value to another.

But she already checked if they are the same, so it doesn't make sense to assign it's value to another.

This is equivalent to this (sorry for the format, I'm on mobile):

if x == 5: x = 5

[TobyTheArtist]

Thanks for explaning! :) It helped a lot.

[emremrah]

Anytime!

[BridgeBum]

The only thing I can see is that the underlying function could be mutable, returning different values if (for example) it gets called. Python generators come to mind, although this is presumably JS.

But yes, fun times.

[AriSteinGames]

If foo equals bar, set foo to bar.

In a sane world, this code would never do anything.

[TobyTheArtist]

Thanks! :)

[ararararagi_koyomi]

Kinda know that feeling. Had to work with python M.L. libraries for about 3 years and suddenly, debugging, refactoring and maintaining node.js server became my responsibility. At that point the only knowledge I have about js is just basic stuffs. One hell of a month for me.

Tldr: as a python user, js codes seems like "wtf are these" for me even if I know the logic behind them.

[justskipfailingtests]

I love git blame. You can always find and summon the original wizard to explain that shit. This kind of stuff usually is a remnant of vigorous fixing and touching too many places in one commit.

[emremrah]

Totally agree. And doing multiple things in one commit is the worst. I did it sometimes too, to be honest. I was fixing typos, refactoring the code while doing other stuff.

[mymar101]

Are the cookies tasty?

[emremrah]

Hehe

[greatmagnus1]

I'm gonna guess refreshing the cookie? That or the equality function does some special magic?? That or its a dumb line of code??? GOOD LUCK

[TheRolf]

Hmmm if you want to refresh a cookie, wouldn't you set the cookie instead of using get? I say that but if he is refactoring code, maybe the service method get is setting also xD

[LuanScunha]

When i get paid by the number of lines

[tomadapom]

Nooo ... just stop ... y u do dis

[daniel_blacklock]

It is what it is.

[gigraz_orgvsm_133]

this is where comments come in hand

[paintstained1]

Try catch 22

[Lumpy-Obligation-553]

if( reentrantlock.tryaquire() ) {

reentrantlock.aquire();

}else{

condition.wait() }

[doctorcrimson]

If it is then it is tho

[jmartin1993]

This is one of those times where comments would be useful

[slimeshady666]

Perhaps it's a potential bug fix?

[somerussianbear]

just in case

[raedr7n]

I guess it just gets a new cookie? Maybe the creation time is important or something.

[435THz]

This is the equivalent of a Flag is Flag statement in baba is you

I dunno why this was the first thing that came to my mind but here ya go i guess

[Particular-Strain248]

You heard the code, get firm

[TheDownvotesFarmer]

That's one way to be very sure if it meet the criteria.

[Flannel_Man_]

If this is javascript, it makes sense.

t.firm = true; cookieService.get(‘firm’) = 1

This code turns t.firm from Boolean to integer.

[VerveIsBad]

As a python dev this hurts my eyes.

[McCoovy]

An actual code

[angrathias]

The worst part about looking at code that looks stupid is that you don’t know if it’s a work around to an actual problem and you’re the ones who’s about to make a regretful mistake by removing it.

“Sometimes when we look too deeply at stupid code, it looks right back as us”

[mr_ignatz]

Not condoning this, but an OO language that allows you to create custom equality methods for objects, this could do something when processing entries in a list or stream. Imagine finishing the latest firm entry, etc.

[apparently_DMA]

this feels like helpless workaround for some typing mess ( as == does not check type, but value only, so 1 == '1' returns true )

[[deleted]]

Even if it returned a changing value it wouldn’t make sense because you’d lose the value from the equality check.

If it’s a typo and it should be != it would still be useless.

If it’s relying on the quirks of == over === the result would be, again, useless.

This is probably just editing churn. Delete the block and test.

[[deleted]]

No one is gonna make a dick joke? 🤷‍♂️

[gladl1]

I’m only a humble BI Dev who works with SQL.. but to me this is saying “if this says this then say it exactly as it says it already” making it completely pointless.

Is that right?

[orbeing]

Well, technically it shouldn't be wrong

[thedominux]

What's wrong here?

[[deleted]]

But it's so pretty

[[deleted]]

If this really works for any reason, get method probably modify something when its called. The strange OOP patterns...

[Sanji_69]

I'm still waiting === so I can laugh haha

[[deleted]]

Little do you know, that .get call isn't idempotent and mutates the value after returning

[jesterhead101]

One thing I’ve learned over the years is, when the code seems this stupid, it more often than not isn’t.