How to deal with a programmer...

when he does not listen to you!

Category:

Comedy

Tags:

• programmer
• loud
• sound
• horn
• hooter
• cubical
• waking
• up
• IT
• ICT

[DutchmanDavid]

"So here I am, working on this bug that's been torturing me for the last 3 hours and this bitch from management, Karla, walks up to me and starts ranting about a "Design Change Request" as if she knows what she's talking about and before I can even break my focus, she pulls a fucking AIRHORN on me, holds it next to my ear and nearly honks my head off! Guess who got "accidentally" deleted from the paycheck database list this week?"

[WarehouseAgencyNYC]

And that's how I quit your shit company

[wrdsanduhmorewrds]

I gotta stock up on airhorns for when my boyfriend isnt paying attention to me. =)

[highseas1853]

hilarious!

[ThreeCatProductions]

what a bitch

[griesrt]

bitch slap that hoe

[9b8]

@stinky472 Also, I agree with your view about namespaces. That also implies a bit about source code organization discipline and practice. The same case goes for nested namespaces - not nearly as elegant in C++ as is in C#. I'm not sure how many "C++" devs out there actually are obedient to those things, instead often opting for the traditional monolithic approach, for better or worse.

[9b8]

@stinky472 I thought Herb Sutter was still the chair. When did he release/relinquish the chair?

Also, just curious what your opinions are about C++ AMP. How do you think it stacks up against other possible/brewing OpenCL C++ language extensions?

[stinky472]

@9b8 Hope you don't actually get tempted to call the operators, but as Sutter says (former ISO C++ committee chair), 'using' directives are what make namespaces usable which might seem counterintuitive since that would invite conflicts, but I think the intent of namespaces was to avoid compilation-unit level conflicts in identifiers by limiting the number of namespaces *used* with the ability to opt in using scope resolution to resolve those rare conflicts.

[9b8]

@stinky472 Ah, you got me! Right, explicitly calling the operators. Always a joy to see someone point out something useful or at least trivial. Of course in a real code environment, I would follow what is practiced and usuall not fall off the ship. I remember trying to overload and override some methods in a simple class hierarchy I had for an assignment, where which I only overrode a few. The using statement was the tickout out for resolving scope to the remaining base impl.

[stinky472]

@9b8 That's not fully qualified. You're depending on ADL. Fully qualified would be: std::operator<<(std::cout, "Male egotist programmer EQ level:").operator<<(sizeof(cha­r)).operator<<(std::endl); I recommend you look into ADL and the issues compilers have in implementing it correctly. Of course it tends to work for these kinds of simplistic examples, but there's a reason gurus like Herb Sutter suggest using declarations and using directives over fully qualified names.

[xm4nfedoralinux]

Oh hell no!! oh hold up, how is this bitch gonna come up in here and blow a horn in my ear talking about design change and shit. Who the fuck does this bitch think she be? Where that bitch go? "Bout to get my 9mm and strap myself. Shit, there go that bitch right thuurr! ...

ME: "Hay Karla, you won!!"

KARLA: "Won what?"....

ME: "The wet t-shirt contest you fucking bitch!!"

RAT-TAT-TAT-TAT!!!