this post was submitted on 09 May 2025
440 points (99.1% liked)

Programmer Humor

23172 readers
837 users here now

Welcome to Programmer Humor!

This is a place where you can post jokes, memes, humor, etc. related to programming!

For sharing awful code theres also Programming Horror.

Rules

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 31 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Artyom@lemm.ee 10 points 2 days ago

Remember the meme where all the parentheses are on the right hand side? This meme is the same.

[–] SubArcticTundra@lemmy.ml 57 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Oooh, that is tempting. The main pain would be center justifying the code. Perhaps if it was left justified...

[–] Gobbel2000@programming.dev 44 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Clearly we need self-centering support from editors.

[–] SubArcticTundra@lemmy.ml 22 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Just one more reason to do your coding in Word.

Technically that is a reason

[–] kuberoot@discuss.tchncs.de 7 points 2 days ago

I think the main pain would be manually aligning the frames on every line with every change, occasionally having to extend the width and updating every line of code to match it

[–] SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world 28 points 2 days ago (2 children)

My employer's CI rejects extended ASCII characters :(

[–] Ghoelian@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (2 children)

Really? You never use the occasional   or something?

Edit: my client actually parses the space lol

[–] Ghoelian@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 2 days ago

Just remembered not all projects have a web interface or an interface at all

[–] SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago

Backslashes are not extended ASCII

[–] AnUnusualRelic@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

That's normal, you should just use Unicode in that case.

[–] SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world 5 points 2 days ago (1 children)
[–] AnUnusualRelic@lemmy.world 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Feel free to encode it whichever way suits you best.

[–] SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Unless it's ISO 8859-1, apparently.

[–] AnUnusualRelic@lemmy.world -1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I'm not sure if you're completely up to date on this whole Unicode thing.

[–] SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago

I'm not sure if you're completely up-to-date on this whole encoding thing.

[–] Flipper@feddit.org 21 points 2 days ago (1 children)

This only half as bad as the emoji soup macros

[–] some_random_nick@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)
[–] Flipper@feddit.org 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I got something better for you.

namespace 🔵 = std;
using 🔢 = int;
using 💀 = void;
using 🕖 = time_t;
using 👌 = bool;
#define 👂 auto
#define 🎌 enum
#define 👎 false
#define 👍 true
#define 👹 "evil"
#define 💪 🔵::make_shared
#define 🍸 virtual
#define 🖥️ 🔵::cout
#define 🔫 🔵::endl
template<class 🔮>
using 📚 = 🔵::vector<🔮>;
template<class 🔮>
using 👇 = 🔵::shared_ptr<🔮>;

🎌 🐒 { 🐵, 🙈, 🙉, 🙊 };
🔢 🎲() { return 🔵::rand(); }
👌 😎() { return 👎; }

struct 🍴 { 🍸 💀 👀() = 0; };
struct 🍊 : 🍴 { 🍸 💀 👀() { 🖥️ << "🍊" << 🔫; }; };
struct 🍉 : 🍴 { 🍸 💀 👀() { 🖥️ << "🍉" << 🔫; }; };
struct 🍒 : 🍴 { 🍸 💀 👀() { 🖥️ << "🍉" << 🔫; }; };
struct 🍓 : 🍴 { 🍸 💀 👀() { 🖥️ << "🍓" << 🔫; }; };
struct 🍍 : 🍴 { 🍸 💀 👀() { 🖥️ << "🍍" << 🔫; }; };
struct 🍅 : 🍴 { 🍸 💀 👀() { 🖥️ << "🍅" << 🔫; }; };

🔢 main()
{
    if(😎() == 👎)
        🖥️ << "💩" << 🔫;

    📚<👇<🍴>> 🍛 = { 💪<🍊>(), 💪<🍉>(), 💪<🍒>(), 💪<🍍>(), 💪<🍅>() };
 
    for (👂 🍏 : 🍛)
        🍏->👀();

    return 🎲();
}
[–] funkless_eck@sh.itjust.works 9 points 2 days ago (1 children)

super minor but I always preferred to define fizzbuzz as modulo 3*5 to show adherence to the instructions in the readability of the code without having to think about why

[–] ryannathans@aussie.zone 6 points 2 days ago

Mmm I think they are missing == 0

[–] irelephant@programming.dev 10 points 2 days ago

This would musk to write, but is honestly really readable.

[–] stingpie@lemmy.world 8 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

You could do this in basic ASCII, with only three defines. replace "_ " with "{", replace "_;" with "}", and "_" with nothing. If your compiler processes macros in the correct order, it will become valid code. (You would use semicolons as the vertical lines)

[–] notabot@lemm.ee 3 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Have they #defined out the equals symbol? I don't think that for loop is going to compile.

[–] SteveTech@programming.dev 22 points 2 days ago

The symbol they defined out is not the equals symbol but rather U+2550, so the for loop is fine.

[–] lime@feddit.nu 3 points 2 days ago (1 children)
[–] notabot@lemm.ee 1 points 2 days ago (2 children)

The #define = line would mean the = would be effectively removed, rendering the for a syntax error. That is, assuming it is an equals sign they've redefined, and not similar looking character.

[–] lime@feddit.nu 13 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

that's not a =, it's a ═ (U+2550 BOX DRAWINGS DOUBLE HORIZONTAL). you can tell because == doesn't connect but ══ does.

[–] notabot@lemm.ee 3 points 2 days ago

Fair point, I wasn't sure it was the equals, hence my initial question. Drawing boxes with the box drawing characters does make a lot more sense.

[–] _____@lemm.ee 1 points 2 days ago

It looks like a different symbol of you were to compare the characters length in pixels

the equals and the horizontal double bars seem different to me.