It's an example of a time when I'm fooling myself into believing that some stupid little thing has an effect on my code.

It's an example of a time when I'm fooling myself into believing that some stupid little thing has an effect on my code. It probably won't break if I remove it, but this is how those situations go down: 1. Something is broken 2. Try to fix it. Still broken. 3. Try to fix it. Still broken. 4. Sleep on it. Try to fix it in the morning. Still broken. 5. Refactor. Still broken. 6. Make a whole bunch of changes, including adding x = x. 7. It works! x=x must have fixed it! Stupid programming language. 8. Add x=x to all future code because it works because Python sucks and is stupid. 9. (optional) Go on Stack Exchange and HN and tell everyone that you need to say x=1.5 and follow it with x=x because Python is stupid and I am so smart to have figured this out.

Posted by freehunter on Jul 21, 2015, 9:29 PM

Tags

• reliability (Other)

Related issues

• This is my biggest problem with agents, they constantly defensively code for cases that have no chance of happening and in most cases a p...
• I wish there was something like LEAN for biology.
• The issue is really the extreme difficulty of programming them, especially for anything sequential (rather than combinatorial).
• I probably could have beared with it if it was only limited to programming, but it showing up in creative fields has made me feel all sor...
• I hate that I'm in deep enough to know what you mean.
• The biggest problem with “AI” is that big corps are shoving it down our throats.