1926: Bad Code - Revision history

FaviFake at 13:18, 29 July 2025

2025-07-29T13:18:19Z

FaviFake: This series can only be defined by the 3 main comics. 1700: New Bug is the same as the other two comics, yet it's not in the series. There are other examples in the Category:Cueball Computer Problems, which instead is a good compromise.

2025-07-29T13:13:43Z

This series can only be defined by the 3 main comics. 1700: New Bug is the same as the other two comics, yet it's not in the series. There are other examples in the Category:Cueball Computer Problems, which instead is a good compromise.

CalibansCreations: /* Explanation */

2025-04-03T11:35:38Z

‎Explanation

ThatoneU: /* Explanation */

2023-08-21T18:54:55Z

‎Explanation

Jacky720: rv

2022-05-04T22:30:57Z

Show changes

Ex Kay Cee Dee at 22:27, 4 May 2022

2022-05-04T22:27:05Z

Show changes

Ex Kay Cee Dee at 22:10, 4 May 2022

2022-05-04T22:10:59Z

Show changes

Jacky720: rv

2022-05-04T21:05:16Z

Show changes

Ex Kay Cee Dee at 20:28, 4 May 2022

2022-05-04T20:28:30Z

Show changes

162.158.146.175: Undo revision 240584 by Ex Kay Cee Dee (talk)

2022-05-04T19:47:36Z

Undo revision 240584 by Ex Kay Cee Dee (talk)

Show changes

@@ Line 44: / Line 44: @@
 [[Category:Programming]]
 [[Category:Computers]]
-[[Category:Cueball Computer Problems]]
+[[Category:Cueball's computer problems]]
 [[Category:Spreadsheets]]

@@ Line 8: / Line 8: @@
 ==Explanation==
 [[Ponytail]] has caught [[Cueball]] in the act of writing some messy code — code in the form of a spreadsheet formula, which in turn produces another program in a language called {{w|Haskell (programming language)|Haskell}}. Haskell is a {{w|purely functional programming}} language, a concept that has a debatably steep learning curve, which causes it to be somewhat obscure, as referenced in [[1312: Haskell]]. It is explained that ''this'' code will, in turn, {{w|Parser|interpret}} ''more'' source code, specifically code written in {{w|HTML}}.  Parsing HTML is notoriously tricky without a dedicated software library for several reasons, including frequent changes to web pages, a nested structure of tags and quotes that frustrates {{w|regular expression}}s, allowing new lines to be started almost anywhere, and different standards that are followed or not followed to varying degrees.
@@ Line 51: / Line 44: @@
 [[Category:Programming]]
 [[Category:Computers]]
 [[Category:Cueball Computer Problems]]
 [[Category:Spreadsheets]]

@@ Line 13: / Line 13: @@
 * [[1833: Code Quality 3]]
 * [[1926: Bad Code]]
-* [[2138|2138: Wanna See the Code?]]
+* [[2138: Wanna See the Code?]]
 [[Ponytail]] has caught [[Cueball]] in the act of writing some messy code — code in the form of a spreadsheet formula, which in turn produces another program in a language called {{w|Haskell (programming language)|Haskell}}. Haskell is a {{w|purely functional programming}} language, a concept that has a debatably steep learning curve, which causes it to be somewhat obscure, as referenced in [[1312: Haskell]]. It is explained that ''this'' code will, in turn, {{w|Parser|interpret}} ''more'' source code, specifically code written in {{w|HTML}}.  Parsing HTML is notoriously tricky without a dedicated software library for several reasons, including frequent changes to web pages, a nested structure of tags and quotes that frustrates {{w|regular expression}}s, allowing new lines to be started almost anywhere, and different standards that are followed or not followed to varying degrees.

@@ Line 19: / Line 19: @@
 After Cueball excuses his bad code by stating that "nothing depends on this" (meaning that no other projects rely on this code being good to operate properly), Ponytail uses the analogy of breaking a non-load-bearing wall to ridicule Cueball's excuse. A {{w|load-bearing wall}} is a wall that plays a role in supporting the building. Damaging such a wall would threaten the structural integrity of the entire building, and could potentially cause a collapse. In contrast, walls that aren't load-bearing are designed only to separate spaces within the building, and do not contribute to keeping the building up. Damaging or destroying such walls wouldn't endanger the overall structure of the building. However, supporting the building is just ''one'' of the functions which could depend on having an intact wall, and non-load-bearing walls are still there for a purpose. Walls serve many other important purposes, from creating opaque and sound blocking barriers (desirable for privacy purposes, particularly for bedrooms and bathrooms), to containing and protecting water pipes and electrical wiring. Ponytail's analogy suggests that, even though poorly written-code wouldn't cause the entire program to fail, it's still not a good idea.
-Immediately after, Ponytail appears to have realized that she's only ''inspired'' Cueball to go ahead and break the wall, instead of swaying him away from writing ugly code. If left unchecked, this will only end in [[905: Homeownership|tragedy]].
+Immediately after, Ponytail appears to have {{tvtropes|Main/OhCrap|realized}} that she's only ''inspired'' Cueball to go ahead and break the wall, instead of swaying him away from writing ugly code. If left unchecked, this will only end in [[905: Homeownership|tragedy]].
 This is most likely a continuation of the [[:Category:Code Quality|Code Quality]] series, but it differs slightly. For one thing, all of the previous strips were named "Code Quality <number>", with the exception of the first, which was just named "Code Quality". Also note that, unlike the previous Code Quality strips, Ponytail does not start using similes like "This is like being in a house built by a child using nothing but a hatchet and a picture of a house". It's also the longest explanation of Cueball's code by Cueball himself.