I found this on the web and I split a seam laughing....


 How To Write Unmaintainable Code

<https://www.doc.ic.ac.uk/%7Esusan/475/index.html>Last updated Thursday, 18-Nov-1999 20:27:28 PDT by Roedy Green <https://www.doc.ic.ac.uk/%7Esusan/475/index.html#CONTACT> ©1997-1999 Canadian Mind Products.

In the interests of creating employment opportunities in the Java programming field, I am passing on these tips from the masters on how to write code that is so difficult to maintain, that the people who come after you will take years to make even the simplest changes. Further, if you follow all these rules religiously, you will even guarantee *yourself* a lifetime of employment, since no one but you has a hope in hell of maintaining the code.


   General Principles

To foil the maintenance programmer, you have to understand how he thinks. He has your giant program. He has no time to read it all, much less understand it. He wants to rapidly find the place to make his change, make it and get out and have no unexpected side effects from the change.

He views your code through a tube taken from the centre of a roll of toilet paper. He can only see a tiny piece of your program at a time. You want to make sure he can never get the big picture from doing that. You want to make it as hard as possible for him to find the code he is looking for. But even more important, you want to make it as awkward as possible for him to safely *ignore* anything.


   Specific Techniques

1. Lie in the comments. You don't have to actively lie, just fail to
   keep comments as up to date with the code.
2. Pepper the code with comments like /* add 1 to i */ however, never
   document wooly stuff like the overall purpose of the package or method.
3. Make sure that every method does a little bit more (or less) than
   its name suggests. As a simple example, a method named isValid(x)
   should as a side effect convert x to binary and store the result in
   a database.
4. Use acronyms to keep the code terse. Real men never define acronyms;
   they understand them genetically.
5. In the interests of efficiency, avoid encapsulation. Callers of a
   method need all the external clues they can get to remind them how
   the method works inside.
6. If, for example, you were writing an airline reservation system,
   make sure there are at least 25 places in the code that need to be
   modified if you were to add another airline. Never document where
   they are. People who come after you have no business modifying your
   code without thoroughly understanding every line of it.
7. In the name of efficiency, use cut/paste/clone/modify. This works
   much faster than using many small reusable modules.
8. *Never never *put a comment on a variable. Facts about how the
   variable is used, its bounds, its legal values, its
   implied/displayed number of decimal points, its units of measure,
   its display format, its data entry rules (e.g. total fill, must
   enter), when its value can be trusted etc. should be gleaned from
   the procedural code. If your boss forces you to write comments, lard
   method bodies with them, but never comment a variable, not even a
   temporary!
9. Try to pack as much as possible into a single line. This saves the
   overhead of temporary variables, and makes source files shorter by
   eliminating new line characters and white space. Tip: remove all
   white space around operators. Good programmers can often hit the 255
   character line length limit imposed by some editors. The bonus of
   long lines is that programmers who cannot read 6 point type must
   scroll to view them.
10. Cd wrttn wtht vwls s mch trsr. When using abbreviations inside
   variable or method names, break the boredom with several variants
   for the same word, and even spell it out longhand once in while.
   This helps defeat those lazy bums who use text search to understand
   only some aspect of your program. Consider variant spellings as a
   variant on the ploy, e.g. mixing International /colour/, with
   American /color/ and dude-speak /kulerz/. If you spell out names in
   full, there is only one possible way to spell each name. These are
   too easy for the maintenance programmer to remember. Because there
   are so many different ways to abbreviate a word, with abbreviations,
   you can have several different variables that all have the same
   apparent purpose. As an added bonus, the maintenance programmer
   might not even notice they are separate variables.
11. Never use an automated source code tidier to keep your code aligned.
   Lobby to have them banned them from your company on the grounds they
   create false deltas in PVCS (version control tracking) or that every
   programmer should have his own indenting style held forever
   sacrosanct for any module he wrote. Banning them is quite easy, even
   though they save the millions of keystrokes doing manual alignment
   and days wasted misinterpreting poorly aligned code. Just insist
   that everyone use the *same* tidied format, not just for storing in
   the common repository, but while they are editing. This starts an
   RWAR and the boss, to keep the peace, will ban automated tidying.
   Without automated tidying, you are now free to /accidentally/
   misalign the code to give the optical illusion that bodies of loops
   and ifs are longer or shorter than they really are, or that else
   clauses match a different if than they really do. e.g.

   if (a)
      if (b) x = y;
   else x = z;

12. Never put in any { } surrounding your if/else blocks unless they are
   syntactically obligatory. If you have a deeply nested mixture of
   if/else statements and blocks, especially with misleading
   indentation, you can trip up even an expert maintenance programmer.
13. Rigidly follow the guidelines about no goto, no early returns, and
   no labelled breaks especially when you can increase the if/else
   nesting depth by at least 5 levels.
14. Use very long variable names that differ from each other by only one
   character, or only in upper/lower case. An ideal variable name pair
   is /swimmer/ and /swimner/. Exploit the failure of most fonts to
   clearly discriminate between ilI1| or oO08 with identifier pairs
   like parselnt and parseInt or D0Calc and DOCalc. l is an
   exceptionally fine choice for a variable name since it will, to the
   casual glance, masquerade as the constant 1. Create varible names
   that differ from each other only in case e.g. HashTable and Hashtable.
15. Wherever scope rules permit, reuse existing unrelated variable
   names. Similarly, use the same temporary variable for two unrelated
   purposes (purporting to save stack slots). For a fiendish variant,
   morph the variable, for example, assign a value to a variable at the
   top of a very long method, and then somewhere in the middle, change
   the meaning of the variable in a subtle way, such as converting it
   from a 0-based coordinate to a 1-based coordinate. Be certain not to
   document this change in meaning.
16. Use lower case l to indicate long constants. e.g. 10l is more likely
   to be mistaken for 101 that 10L is.
17. Ignore the conventions in Java for where to use upper case in
   variable and class names i.e. Classes start with upper case,
   variables with lower case, constants are all upper case, with
   internal words capitalised. After all, Sun does (e.g. instanceof vs
   isInstanceOf, Hashtable). Not to worry, the compiler won't even
   issue a warning to give you away. If your boss forces you to use the
   conventions, when there is any doubt about whether an internal word
   should be capitalised, avoid capitalising or make a random choice,
   e.g. use both inputFileName and outputfilename. You can of course
   drive your team members insane by inventing your *own* insanely
   complex naming conventions then berate others for not following
   them. The ultimate technique is to create as many variable names as
   possible that differ subtlely from each other only in case.
18. Never use i for the innermost loop variable. Use anything but. Use i
   liberally for any other purpose especially for non-int variables.
   Similary use n as a loop index.
19. Never use local variables. Whenever you feel the temptation to use
   one, make it into an instance or static variable instead to
   unselfishly share it with all the other methods of the class. This
   will save you work later when other methods need similar
   declarations. C++ programmers can go a step further by making all
   variables global.
20. Never document gotchas in the code. If you suspect there may be a
   bug in a class, keep it to yourself. If you have ideas about how the
   code should be reorganised or rewritten, for heaven's sake, do not
   write them down. Remember the words of Thumper /"If you can't say
   anything nice, don't say anything at all"/. What if the programmer
   who wrote that code saw your comments? What if the owner of the
   company saw them? What if a customer did? You could get yourself fired.
21. To break the boredom, use a thesaurus to look up as much alternate
   vocabulary as possible to refer to the same action, e.g. /display/,
   /show/, /present/. Vaguely hint there is some subtle difference,
   where none exists. However, if there are two similar functions that
   have a crucial difference, always use the same word in describing
   both functions (e.g. /print/ to mean write to a file, and to a print
   on a laser, and to display on the screen). Under no circumstances,
   succumb to demands to write a glossary with the special purpose
   project vocabulary unambiguously defined. Doing so would be
   unprofessional breach of the structured design principle of
   /information hiding./
22. In naming functions, make heavy use of abstract words like /it/,
   /everything/, /data/, /handle/, /stuff/, /do/, /routine/, /perform/
   and the digits e.g. routineX48, PerformDataFunction, DoIt,
   HandleStuff and do_args_method.
23. In Java, all primitives passed as parameters are effectively
   read-only because they are passed by value. The callee can modify
   the parameters, but that has no effect on the caller's variables. In
   contrast all objects passed are read-write. The reference is passed
   by value, which means the object itself is effectively passed by
   reference. The callee can do whatever it wants to the fields in your
   object. Never document whether a method actually modifies the fields
   in each of the passed parameters. Name your methods to suggest they
   only look at the fields when they actually change them.
24. Never document the units of measure of any variable, input, output
   or parameter. e.g. feet, metres, cartons. This is not so important
   in bean counting, but it is very important in engineering work. As a
   corollary, never document the units of measure of any conversion
   constants, or how the values were derived. It is mild cheating, but
   very effective, to salt the code with some incorrect units of
   measure in the comments. If you are feeling particularly malicious,
   make up your *own* unit of measure; name it after yourself or some
   obscure person and never define it. If somebody challenges you, tell
   them you did so that you could use integer rather than floating
   point arithmetic.
25. In engineering work there are two ways to code. One is to convert
   all inputs to S.I. (metric) units of measure, then do your
   calculations then convert back to various civil units of measure for
   output. The other is to maintain the various mixed measure systems
   throughout. Always choose the second. It's the American way!
26. I am going to let you in on a little-known coding secret. Exceptions
   are a pain in the behind. Properly-written code never fails, so
   exceptions are actually unnecessary. Don't waste time on them.
   Subclassing exceptions is for incompetents who know their code will
   fail. You can greatly simplify your program by having only a single
   try/catch in the entire application (in main) that calls
   System.exit(). Just stick a perfectly standard set of throws on
   every method header whether they could throw any exceptions or not.
27. C compilers transform myArray[i] into *(myArray + i), which is
   equivalent to *(i + myArray) which is equivalent to i[myArray].
   Experts know to put this to good use. Unfortunately, this technique
   can only be used in native classes.
28. If you have an array with 100 elements in it, hard code the literal
   100 in as many places in the program as possible. Never use a static
   final named constant for the 100, or refer to it as myArray.length.
   To make changing this constant even more difficult, use the literal
   50 instead of 100/2, or 99 instead of 100-1. You can futher disguise
   the 100 by checking for a == 101 instead of a > 100 or a > 99
   instead of a >= 100.


   Consider things like page sizes, where the lines consisting of x
   header, y body, and z footer lines, you can apply the obfuscations
   independently to each of these *and* to their partial or total sums.

   These time-honoured techniques are especially effective in a program
   with two unrelated arrays that just accidentally happen to both have
   100 elements. There are even more fiendish variants. To lull the
   maintenance programmer into a false sense of security, dutifully
   create the named constant, but very occasionally /"accidentally"/
   use the literal 100 value instead of the named constant. Most
   fiendish of all, in place of the literal 100 or the correct named
   constant, sporadically use some other unrelated named constant that
   just accidentally happens to have the value 100, for now. It almost
   goes without saying that you should avoid any consistent naming
   scheme that would associate an array name with its size constant.

29. Eschew any form of table-driven logic. It starts out innocently
   enough, but soon leads to end users proofreading and then /shudder/,
   even modifying the tables for themselves.
30. Nest as deeply as you can. Good coders can get up to 10 levels of (
   ) on a single line and 20 { } in a single method. C++ coders have
   the additional powerful option of preprocessor nesting totally
   independent of the nest structure of the underlying code. You earn
   extra Brownie points whenever the beginning and end of a block
   appear on separate pages in a printed listing. Wherever possible,
   convert nested ifs into nested [? :] ternaries.
31. Join a computer book of the month club. Select authors who appear to
   be too busy writing books to have had any time to actually write any
   code themselves. Browse the local bookstore for titles with lots of
   cloud diagrams in them and no coding examples. Skim these books to
   learn obscure pedantic words you can use to intimidate the
   whippersnappers that come after you. Your code should impress. If
   people can't understand your vocabulary, they must assume that you
   are very intelligent and that your algorithms are very deep. Avoid
   any sort of homely analogies in your algorithm explanations.
32. Make "improvements" to your code often, and force users to upgrade
   often - after all, no one wants to be running an outdated version.
   Just because they think they're happy with the program as it is,
   just think how much happier they will be after you've "fixed" it!
   Don't tell anyone what the differences between versions are unless
   you are forced to - after all, why tell someone about bugs in the
   old version they might never have noticed otherwise?
33. The About Box should contain only the name of the program, the names
   of the coders and a copyright notice written in legalese. Ideally it
   should link to several megs of code that produce an entertaining
   animated display. However, it should *never* contain a description
   of what the program is for, its minor version number, or the date of
   the most recent code revision, or the website where to get the
   updates, or the author's email address. This way all the users will
   soon all be running on different versions, and will attempt to
   install version N+2 before installing version N+1.
34. The more changes you can make between versions the better, you don't
   want users to become bored with the same old API or user interface
   year after year. Finally, if you can make this change without the
   users noticing, this is better still - it will keep them on their
   toes, and keep them from becoming complacent.
35. If you have to write classes for some other programmer to use, put
   environment-checking code (getenv() in C++ / System.getProperty() in
   Java) in your classes' nameless static initializers, and pass all
   your arguments to the classes this way, rather than in the
   constructor methods. The advantage is that the initializer methods
   get called as soon as the class program binaries get /loaded/, even
   before any of the classes get instantiated, so they will usually get
   executed before the program main(). In other words, there will be no
   way for the rest of the program to modify these parameters before
   they get read into your classes - the users better have set up all
   their environment variables just the way you had them!
36. Choose your variable names to have absolutely no relation to the
   labels used when such variables are displayed on the screen. E.g. on
   the screen label the field /"Postal Code"/ but in the code call the
   associated variable /"zip"/.
37. Java lets you create methods that have the same name as the class,
   but that are not constructors. Exploit this to sow confusion.
38. Never use layouts. That way when the maintenance programmer adds one
   more field he will have to manually adjust the absolute co-ordinates
   of every other thing displayed on the screen. If your boss forces
   you to use a layout, use a single giant GridBagLayout, and hard code
   in absolute grid co-ordinates.
39. In Java, disdain the interface. If your supervisors complain, tell
   them that Java interfaces force you to "cut-and-paste" code between
   different classes that implement the same interface the same way,
   and they /know/ how hard that would be to maintain. Instead, do as
   the Java AWT designers did - put lots of functionality in your
   classes that can only be used by classes that inherit from them, and
   use lots of "instanceof" checks in your methods. This way, if
   someone wants to reuse your code, they have to extend your classes.
   If they want to reuse your code from two different classes - tough
   luck, they can't extend both of them at once!
40. Make all of your leaf classes final. After all, /you're/ done with
   the project - certainly no one else could possibly improve on your
   work by extending your classes. And it might even be a security flaw
   - after all, isn't java.lang.String final for just this reason? If
   other coders in your project complain, tell them about the execution
   speed improvement you're getting.
41. Make as many of your variables as possible static. If /you/ don't
   need more than one instance of the class in this program, no one
   else ever will either. Again, if other coders in the project
   complain, tell them about the execution speed improvement you're
   getting.
42. Keep all of your unused and outdated methods and variables around in
   your code. After all - if you needed to use it once in 1976, who
   knows if you will want to use it again sometime? Sure the program's
   changed since then, but it might just as easily change back, you
   "don't want to have to reinvent the wheel" (supervisors love talk
   like that). If you have left the comments on those methods and
   variables untouched, and sufficiently cryptic, anyone maintaining
   the code will be too scared to touch them.
43. On a method called /makeSnafucated /insert only the comment /* make
   snafucated */. Never define what /snafucated /means */anywhere/*.
   Only a fool does not already know, with complete certainty, what
   /snafucated/ means.
44. Reverse the parameters on a method called drawRectangle(height,
   width) to drawRectangle(width, height) without making any change
   whatsoever to the name of the method. Then a few releases later,
   reverse it back again. The maintenance programmers can't tell by
   quickly looking at any call if it has been adjusted yet.
   Generalisations are left as an exercise for the reader.
45. Instead of using a parameters to a single method, create as many
   separate methods as you can. For example instead of setAlignment(int
   alignment) where alignment is an enumerated constant, for left,
   right, center, create three methods: setLeftAlignment,
   setRightAlignment, and setCenterAlignment. Of course, for the full
   effect, you must clone the common logic to make it hard to keep in sync.
46. The /Kama Sutra/ technique has the added advantage of driving any
   users or documenters of the package to distraction as well as the
   maintenance programmers. Create a dozen overloaded variants of the
   same method that differ in only the most minute detail. I think it
   was Oscar Wilde who observed that positions 47 and 115 of the Kama
   Sutra were the same except in 115 the woman had her fingers crossed.
   Users of the package then have to carefully peruse the long list of
   methods to figure out just which variant to use. The technique also
   balloons the documentation and thus ensures it will more likely be
   out of date. If the boss asks why you are doing this, explain it is
   solely for the convenience of the users. Again for the full effect,
   clone any common logic.
47. Declare every method and variable public. After all, somebody,
   sometime might want to use it. Once a method has been declared
   public, it can't very well be retracted, now can it? This makes it
   very difficult to later change the way anything works under the
   covers. It also has the delightful side effect of obscuring what a
   class is for. If the boss asks if you are out of your mind, tell him
   you are following the classic principles of transparent interfaces.
48. In C++, overload library functions by using #define. That way it
   looks like you are using a familiar library function where in
   actuality you are using something totally different.
49. In C++, overload +,-,*,/ to do things totally unrelated to addition,
   subtraction etc. After all, if the Stroustroup can use the shift
   operator to do I/O, why should you not be equally creative? If you
   overload +, make sure you do it in a way that i = i + 5; has a
   totally different meaning from i += 5;
50. When documenting, and you need an arbitrary name to represent a
   filename use /"file"/. Never use an obviously arbitrary name like
   /"Charlie.dat"/ or /"Frodo.txt"/. In general, in your examples, use
   arbitrary names that sound as much like reserved keywords as
   possible. For example, good names for parameters or variables would
   be: /"bank"/, /"blank"/, /"class"/, /"const"/, /"constant"/,
   /"input"/, /"key"/, /"keyword"/, /"kind"/, /"output"/,
   /"parameter""parm"/, /"system"/, /"type"/, /"value"/, /"var"/ and
   /"variable"/. If you use actual reserved words for your arbitrary
   names, which would be rejected by your command processor or
   compiler, so much the better. If you do this well, the users will be
   hopelessly confused between reserved keywords and arbitrary names in
   your example, but you can look innocent, claiming you did it to help
   them associate the appropriate purpose with each variable.
51. Always document your command syntax with your own, unique,
   undocumented brand of BNF notation. Never explain the syntax by
   providing a suite of annotated sample valid and invalid commands.
   That would demonstrate a complete lack of academic rigour. Railway
   diagrams are almost as gauche. Make sure there is no obvious way of
   telling a terminal symbol (something you would actually type) from
   an intermediate one -- something that represents a phrase in the
   syntax. Never use typeface, colour, caps, or any other visual clues
   to help the reader distinguish the two. Use the exact same
   punctuation glyphs in your BNF notation that you use in the command
   language itself, so the reader can never tell if a (...), [...],
   {...} or "..." is something you actually type as part of the
   command, or is intended to give clues about which syntax elements
   are obligatory, repeatable or optional in your BNF notation. After
   all, if they are too stupid to figure out your variant of BNF, they
   have no business using your program.
52. The macro preprocessor offers great opportunities for obfuscation.
   The key technique is to nest macro expansions several layers deep so
   that you have to discover all the various parts in many different
   *.hpp files. Placing executable code into macros then including
   those macros in every *.cpp file (even those that never use those
   macros) will maximize the amount of recompilation necessary if ever
   that code changes.
53. Java is schizophrenic about array declarations. You can do them the
   old C, way String x[], (which uses mixed pre-postfix notation) or
   the new way String[] x, which uses pure prefix notation. If you want
   to really confuse people, mix the notations: e.g.
       byte*[]* rowvector*,* colvector*,* matrix*[]*; which is equivalent to:
       byte*[]* rowvector;
       byte*[]* colvector;
       byte*[][]* matrix; Java offers great opportunity for obfuscation 
whenever you have to
54. convert. As a simple example, if you have to convert a double to a
   String, go circuitously, via Double with new Double(d).toString
   rather than the more direct Double.toString(d). You can, of course,
   be far more circuitous than that! Avoid any conversion techniques
   recommended by the Conversion Amanuensis
   <https://www.doc.ic.ac.uk/%7Esusan/475/ConverterNative.html>. You
   get bonus points for every extra temporary object you leave
   littering the heap after your conversion.
55. Use threads with abandon.


   Philosophy

The people who design languages are the people who write the compilers and system classes. Quite naturally they design to make their work easy and mathematically elegant. However, there are 10,000 maintenance programmers to every compiler writer. The grunt maintenance programmers have absolutely no say in the design of languages. Yet the total amount of code they write dwarfs the code in the compilers.

An example of the result of this sort of elitist thinking is the JDBC interface. It makes life easy for the JDBC implementor, but a nightmare for the maintenance programmer. It is far *clumsier* than the Fortran interface that came out with SQL three decades ago.

Maintenance programmers, if somebody ever consulted them, would demand ways to hide the housekeeping details so they could see the forest for the trees. They would demand all sorts of shortcuts so they would not have to type so much and so they could see more of the program at once on the screen. They would complain loudly about the myriad petty time-wasting tasks the compilers demand of them.

There are some efforts in this direction: NetRexx <http://www2.hursley.ibm.com/netrexx/>, Bali <https://www.doc.ic.ac.uk/%7Esusan/475/bali.html>, and visual editors (e.g. IBM's Visual Age is a start) that can collapse detail irrelevant to the current purpose.


   The Shoemaker Has No Shoes

Imagine having an accountant as a client who insisted on maintaining his general ledgers using a word processor. You would do you best to persuade him that his data should be structured. He needs validation with cross field checks. You would persuade him he could do so much more with that data when stored in a database, including controlled simultaneous update.

Imagine taking on a software developer as a client. He insists on maintaining all his data with a text editor. He is not yet even exploiting the word processor's colour, type size or fonts.

Think of what might happen if we started storing source code as structured data. We could view the *same* source code in many alternate ways, e.g. as Java, as NextRex, as a decision table, as a flow chart, as a loop structure skeleton (with the detail stripped off), as Java with various levels of detail or comments removed, as Java with highlights on the variables and method invocations of current interest, or as Java with generated comments about argument names and/or types. We could display complex arithmetic expressions in 2D, the way TeX and mathematicians do. You could see code with additional or fewer parentheses, (depending on how comfortable you feel with the precedence rules ). Parenthesis nests could use varying size and colour to help matching by eye. With changes as transparent overlay sets that you can optionally remove or apply, you could watch in real time as other programmers on your team, working in a different country, modified code in classes that you were working on too.

You could use the full colour abilities of the modern screen to give subliminal clues, e.g. by automatically assigning a portion of the spectrum to each package/class using a pastel shades as the backgrounds to any references to methods or variables of that class. You could bold face the definition of any identifier to make it stand out.

You could ask what methods/constructors will produce an object of type X? What methods will accept an object of type X as a parameter? What variables are accessible in this point in the code? By clicking on a method invocation or variable reference, you could see its definition, helping sort out which version of a given method will actually be invoked. You could ask to globally visit all references to a given method or variable, and tick them off once each was dealt with. You could do quite a bit of code writing by point and click.

Some of these ideas would not pan out. But the best way to find out which would be valuable in practice is to try them. Once we had the basic tool, we could experiment with hundreds of similar ideas to make like easier for the maintenance programmer.

I discuss this further under SCID and in the SCID student project <https://www.doc.ic.ac.uk/%7Esusan/475/projects.html#SCID>.


---
Talk Mailing List
[email protected]
https://gtalug.org/mailman/listinfo/talk

Reply via email to