Page 213 of 217

Re: ITT: We make xkcd slightly worse.

Posted: Fri Sep 23, 2016 12:32 am UTC
by svenman
473 + 178:

Image

While I'm at it, 178 + 231:

Image

OTT-style redundant
Spoiler:
xkcd0473_0178_sw.png
Above image based on xkcd comic 473 "Still Raw" with text partially replaced by text from xkcd comic 178 "Not Really Into Pokémon", both by Randall Munroe and published under CC-BY-NC 2.5.

xkcd0178_0231_sw.png
Above image based on xkcd comic 178 "Not Really Into Pokémon" with text and graphics partially replaced by text and graphics from xkcd comic 231 "Cat Proximity", both by Randall Munroe and published under CC-BY-NC 2.5.

Re: ITT: We make xkcd slightly worse.

Posted: Fri Sep 30, 2016 6:18 pm UTC
by Envelope Generator
I had a year's worth of these to read through and I think this one wins.
Coyne wrote:1659

Image]

Re: ITT: We make xkcd slightly worse.

Posted: Mon Oct 03, 2016 9:16 am UTC
by svenman
Another, more surreal take on 178 + 231 (which enabled me to get rid of some unsightly scaling artifacts as well):

Image

OTT-style redundant
Spoiler:
xkcd0178_0231_sw2.png
Image based on graphics and text from xkcd comic 178 "Not Really Into Pokémon" and xkcd comic 231 "Cat Proximity", both by Randall Munroe and published under CC-BY-NC 2.5. Some text added by author of this modification.

Re: ITT: We make xkcd slightly worse.

Posted: Fri Oct 07, 2016 12:27 pm UTC
by Whizbang

Re: ITT: We make xkcd slightly worse.

Posted: Sat Oct 08, 2016 10:02 am UTC
by Monika
Very good.

Re: ITT: We make xkcd slightly worse.

Posted: Tue Oct 11, 2016 8:43 pm UTC
by teelo
925

Re: ITT: We make xkcd slightly worse.

Posted: Wed Oct 12, 2016 4:55 pm UTC
by Monika

Re: ITT: We make xkcd slightly worse.

Posted: Sun Oct 23, 2016 12:55 am UTC
by teelo
178

Re: ITT: We make xkcd slightly worse.

Posted: Thu Oct 27, 2016 11:50 pm UTC
by chridd
Movie Parodies (Movie Folder (1751)) [transcript]
movie_parodies.png
He's Black Hat Guy because he's downloading videos from YouTube. (I don't actually know if such channels exist—I've never looked for them—but it seems like the sort of thing that probably would exist.)
movie_parodies.png (11.51 KiB) Viewed 21474 times


Extreme Goalz (Life Goals (1750)) [transcript]
extreme_goalz.png
Solve for x


will_it_work.cpp (Will It Work (1742)) [transcript]
will_it_work.png
if(phase_of_moon() == FULL) work(); else crash();


Datacentÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ (Datacenter Scale (1737)) [transcript]
datacent________.png
Uh oh... AAAA FIRE RUN AWAY!!!


Rcdeiimnostu (Reductionism (1734)) [transcript]
rcdeiimnostu.png
It's exactly the same as the original comic, just in a different order.
rcdeiimnostu.png (669 Bytes) Viewed 21474 times

Re: ITT: We make xkcd slightly worse.

Posted: Fri Oct 28, 2016 12:03 am UTC
by commodorejohn
chridd wrote:will_it_work.cpp (Will It Work (1742)) [transcript]
will_it_work.png

Code: Select all

if(strcmp(SOURCE,"Programmer who compares char * values when they mean to perform a string comparison") == 0)
   cout << "Heh. Heh heh heh. Eheheheheh.";

Re: ITT: We make xkcd slightly worse.

Posted: Fri Oct 28, 2016 5:54 am UTC
by phlip
Also, writing to a pointer that hasn't been initialised, which will segfault if you're lucky...

I love the sorted-pixels one, though.

Re: ITT: We make xkcd slightly worse.

Posted: Fri Oct 28, 2016 6:10 am UTC
by chridd
By the way, I count at least 11 problems with the code (12 if you count it all being in upper-case, but I did in fact type it all in the correct case, it's just the font; and of course there may be more, since I didn't test it). (And lack of "return 0;" isn't one of them; end of §3.6.1, page 62.)

Re: ITT: We make xkcd slightly worse.

Posted: Fri Oct 28, 2016 8:39 am UTC
by Diadem
chridd wrote:By the way, I count at least 11 problems with the code (12 if you count it all being in upper-case, but I did in fact type it all in the correct case, it's just the font; and of course there may be more, since I didn't test it). (And lack of "return 0;" isn't one of them; end of §3.6.1, page 62.)

That many?
I count
Spoiler:
- The two already mentioned
- no std:: before calls to std functions.
- missing newlines
- You don't flush your output to cout
- there's a semicolon after the last if
- the || in the first if (very nice. Such a logical mistake)
- a hard enter inside a string literal (though that could be due to formatting. So I wouldn't normally count that as an error on printed code)

What are the other three?

Re: ITT: We make xkcd slightly worse.

Posted: Fri Oct 28, 2016 9:35 am UTC
by phlip
Spoiler:
- Semicolon after one of the ifs [edit] never mind, you already had that one and I didn't see it [/edit]
- "=" instead of "==" (instead of strcmp) in one of the ifs
- Unicode directional quote marks
- "Copy-and past"
- No fallback else case
- No newline before the opening brace ( :P )
- The hard enter inside a string literal is a real bug - if you click the "Transcript" link you can see it's there in the unformatted text.

Also, the missing std::endls and not flushing are really the same item, because std::endl flushes the output for you.

Re: ITT: We make xkcd slightly worse.

Posted: Fri Oct 28, 2016 11:10 am UTC
by Diadem
phlip wrote:
Spoiler:
- Semicolon after one of the ifs [edit] never mind, you already had that one and I didn't see it [/edit]
- "=" instead of "==" (instead of strcmp) in one of the ifs
- Unicode directional quote marks
- "Copy-and past"
- No fallback else case
- No newline before the opening brace ( :P )
- The hard enter inside a string literal is a real bug - if you click the "Transcript" link you can see it's there in the unformatted text.

Also, the missing std::endls and not flushing are really the same item, because std::endl flushes the output for you.

Spoiler:
Wow, completely missed the single = and unicode code marks. So easy to overlook those kinda issues. I saw the missing else of course, but that's not really a programming error, more a style issue (and maybe a UX issue. But the entire program is one big UX horror).

'Missing newlines' and 'not flushing' are not the same error, unless you always do newlines with std::endl, in which case you deserve to be slapped.

Re: ITT: We make xkcd slightly worse.

Posted: Fri Oct 28, 2016 1:24 pm UTC
by Flumble
cout automatically flushes when the stream initializer is destroyed and when cin is asked for input. And ending your program with a newline is a choice, just like having no final else. [edit] oh darn, I forgot about the multiple outputs at the start that mustn't go on one line. Alright, there are missing newlines. [/edit]

So left on the list are:
Spoiler:
  1. no std::
  2. wrong quotation marks
  3. no newlines between cout/cin calls
  4. no initialization of source
  5. char* comparison with ==
  6. wrong use of ||
  7. using = instead of == for comparison
  8. typo in "copy-and past"
  9. semicolon after if condition

Re: ITT: We make xkcd slightly worse.

Posted: Fri Oct 28, 2016 4:13 pm UTC
by chridd
"copy-and past"
Oh, right, I missed that one when counting. (I think that was an actual unintended typo...)
Flumble wrote:So left on the list are:
Spoiler:
  1. no std::
  2. wrong quotation marks
  3. no newlines between cout/cin calls
  4. no initialization of source
  5. char* comparison with ==
  6. wrong use of ||
  7. using = instead of == for comparison
  8. typo in "copy-and past"
  9. semicolon after if condition
You missed the linebreak in the middle of the string.

Some hints for the last two:
Spoiler:
• there's a quirk that cin >> has that would make all these comparisons fail if they worked as intended.
• the last one's more a major design/user experience issue, rather than something in one specific place in the code

Re: ITT: We make xkcd slightly worse.

Posted: Sat Oct 29, 2016 1:24 am UTC
by TvT Rivals
...

Did really nobody mention the missing "s" in "intall" yet?

Re: ITT: We make xkcd slightly worse.

Posted: Sat Oct 29, 2016 1:53 am UTC
by phlip
chridd wrote:
Spoiler:
• there's a quirk that cin >> has that would make all these comparisons fail if they worked as intended.

Spoiler:
Oh, right, it like stops at the first whitespace or something, doesn't it?

I straight-up never use cin>> or scanf or any of that whole variety of input methods because I know they never actually do what you want, but as a result I kinda forget the details...

Re: ITT: We make xkcd slightly worse.

Posted: Sat Oct 29, 2016 2:31 am UTC
by Flumble
chridd wrote:You missed the linebreak in the middle of the string.

Ah, oops, I thought that was dismissed as a line-wrap. (I'd like to back it up with "but the syntax highlighting", but the highlighting is wrong already because of the other bug)

chridd wrote:Some hints for the last two:
Spoiler:
• there's a quirk that cin >> has that would make all these comparisons fail if they worked as intended.
• the last one's more a major design/user experience issue, rather than something in one specific place in the code

Ouch, that is one cheeky bug. :shock: (well, perhaps it's dull and expected by someone who actually works with C++, but to me it's sly)
@phlip correct

Re: ITT: We make xkcd slightly worse.

Posted: Sat Oct 29, 2016 3:10 am UTC
by chridd
phlip wrote:
Spoiler:
Oh, right, it like stops at the first whitespace or something, doesn't it?

I straight-up never use cin>> or scanf or any of that whole variety of input methods because I know they never actually do what you want, but as a result I kinda forget the details...
Exactly! Back when I was first learning C++, I only knew about cin >>, so that's a problem that I've encountered.

TvT Rivals wrote:...

Did really nobody mention the missing "s" in "intall" yet?
Even I didn't notice that one until you pointed it out just now.

Re: ITT: We make xkcd slightly worse.

Posted: Sat Oct 29, 2016 11:19 am UTC
by Diadem
chridd wrote:
phlip wrote:
Spoiler:
Oh, right, it like stops at the first whitespace or something, doesn't it?

I straight-up never use cin>> or scanf or any of that whole variety of input methods because I know they never actually do what you want, but as a result I kinda forget the details...
Exactly! Back when I was first learning C++, I only knew about cin >>, so that's a problem that I've encountered.

I'm with phlip. I've never in my life used cin, and I don't expect I ever will, so I've never bothered to learn its specifics.

That entire program is kind of ridiculous. Why would you ever make your users type out string literals in response to a query that's basically "select from a list". The only use case for that is something like making a user type out a full "YES" before reformatting an entire disk drive, and even in cases like that you wouldn't make the user type out an entire sentence without showing the sentence to be typed somewhere on the screen.

Re: ITT: We make xkcd slightly worse.

Posted: Sat Oct 29, 2016 2:05 pm UTC
by chridd
Diadem wrote:That entire program is kind of ridiculous. Why would you ever make your users type out string literals in response to a query that's basically "select from a list". The only use case for that is something like making a user type out a full "YES" before reformatting an entire disk drive, and even in cases like that you wouldn't make the user type out an entire sentence without showing the sentence to be typed somewhere on the screen.
...and that's basically the last of the 11 13 problems with the code (that it makes users type long, exact phrases with no indication anywhere what the possible phrases are, and gives no indication what went wrong if you don't).

Re: ITT: We make xkcd slightly worse.

Posted: Sun Oct 30, 2016 8:29 pm UTC
by Monika

Code: Select all

REPORT zlikelyhood. " customer reports have to start with z or y

PARAMETERS: p_source TYPE c length 100.

WRITE: / 'Likelyhood you will get code working'.

CASE p_source.
  WHEN 'APP STORE' OR 'PACKAGE MANAGER'.
    WRITE: / 'Very likely'.
  WHEN 'GITHUB LINK' OR 'SOURCEFORGE LINK'.
    WRITE: / 'Likely'.
  WHEN 'GEOCITIES LINK' OR 'TRIPOD LINK'.
    WRITE: / 'Somewhat likely'.
  WHEN 'COPY-AND-PASTE EXAMPLE CODE FROM PAPER''S APPENDIX'.
    WRITE: / 'Somewhat likely'.
  WHEN 'THIS CODE'.
    WRITE: / 'This is tested coded and it ran just fine.'.
  WHEN OTHERS.
    WRITE: / 'None of the above'.
ENDCASE.


10 internet points for the first person to identify the programming language.

Re: ITT: We make xkcd slightly worse.

Posted: Sun Oct 30, 2016 8:42 pm UTC
by Sableagle
Whatever language they're using over on OURCEFORGE these days, I guess.

Re: ITT: We make xkcd slightly worse.

Posted: Sun Oct 30, 2016 10:49 pm UTC
by phlip
Monika wrote:
WHEN OTHERS.
WRITE: / 'None of the above'.

Nice.

Re: ITT: We make xkcd slightly worse.

Posted: Mon Oct 31, 2016 11:32 am UTC
by Monika
Sableagle wrote:Whatever language they're using over on OURCEFORGE these days, I guess.

Pfff ^^

Took the opportunity to put it into [ code ] tags.

Re: ITT: We make xkcd slightly worse.

Posted: Thu Nov 03, 2016 1:10 am UTC
by teelo
I had a brainfart earlier and decided to turn it into an xkcdSW.

790

Re: ITT: We make xkcd slightly worse.

Posted: Fri Nov 11, 2016 8:49 pm UTC
by teelo
1756

Australia/NZ? No, fuck off, we're full.

Re: ITT: We make xkcd slightly worse.

Posted: Wed Nov 16, 2016 12:04 pm UTC
by svenman
This came up in the ICT thread for comic 1759 (link to original post), looking to me like it would be perfect as an xkcdsw:
Eudae wrote:Had to fix the latest comic:

http://imgur.com/a/FkYBz

Re: ITT: We make xkcd slightly worse.

Posted: Wed Nov 16, 2016 2:11 pm UTC
by Monika
Perfect in every way.

Re: ITT: We make xkcd slightly worse.

Posted: Thu Nov 17, 2016 1:24 am UTC
by ThirdParty
So much can be done with 1759. I ran out of energy to work on this one, but thought I'd share the half-finished product anyway:

1759 with icons.jpg

Geography tip: you can safely assume that any place you've heard of is larger and more important than any place you haven't.

Re: ITT: We make xkcd slightly worse.

Posted: Fri Nov 18, 2016 1:31 pm UTC
by Envelope Generator

Re: ITT: We make xkcd slightly worse.

Posted: Sat Nov 19, 2016 2:13 pm UTC
by Sableagle
1759: "British Map"

British Map.png

Re: ITT: We make xkcd slightly worse.

Posted: Sun Nov 20, 2016 11:13 am UTC
by teelo
Hopping on the 1759 bandwagon.

Re: ITT: We make xkcd slightly worse.

Posted: Sun Nov 20, 2016 12:55 pm UTC
by Flumble
I hope you're just nerd-sniping the Dutch, because New Zealand is named after the dutch region Zeeland rather than the danish Sjælland.

Re: ITT: We make xkcd slightly worse.

Posted: Tue Nov 22, 2016 6:54 am UTC
by Envelope Generator

Re: ITT: We make xkcd slightly worse.

Posted: Tue Nov 22, 2016 7:53 pm UTC
by teelo
I was thinking of naming the boxes the way they were in that Futurama episode about the alternate universe, but can't remember what they said.

Re: ITT: We make xkcd slightly worse.

Posted: Tue Nov 22, 2016 8:07 pm UTC
by Deva
Named the original universe and its first alternate "Universe A" and "Universe 1", respectively. Labeled the rest by number, such as Universe #6. (One "exception": Universe XVII.) Rarely wrote numbers on the boxes. Displayed it in white text on-screen without the '#', generally. See:
Universe 1729.png

Re: ITT: We make xkcd slightly worse.

Posted: Fri Nov 25, 2016 2:45 pm UTC
by Monika
Monika wrote:

Code: Select all

REPORT zlikelyhood. " customer reports have to start with z or y

PARAMETERS: p_source TYPE c length 100.

WRITE: / 'Likelyhood you will get code working'.

CASE p_source.
  WHEN 'APP STORE' OR 'PACKAGE MANAGER'.
    WRITE: / 'Very likely'.
  WHEN 'GITHUB LINK' OR 'SOURCEFORGE LINK'.
    WRITE: / 'Likely'.
  WHEN 'GEOCITIES LINK' OR 'TRIPOD LINK'.
    WRITE: / 'Somewhat likely'.
  WHEN 'COPY-AND-PASTE EXAMPLE CODE FROM PAPER''S APPENDIX'.
    WRITE: / 'Somewhat likely'.
  WHEN 'THIS CODE'.
    WRITE: / 'This is tested coded and it ran just fine.'.
  WHEN OTHERS.
    WRITE: / 'None of the above'.
ENDCASE.


10 internet points for the first person to identify the programming language.

It's ABAP.