[Corso Python3] bellissimo :-)

[alessandro medici]

https://www.thc.org/root/phun/unmaintain.html


How To Write Unmaintainable Code and  Ensure a job for life ;-)

Introduction

Never ascribe to malice, that which can be explained by incompetence.
- Napoleon

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. Then again, if you followed all these rules
religiously, even you wouldn't be able to maintain the code!

You don't want to overdo this. Your code should not look hopelessly
unmaintainable, just be that way. Otherwise it stands the risk of being
rewritten or refactored.

General Principles

Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum sonatur.
- Whatever is said in Latin sounds profound.

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 toilet paper tube. He can only see a tiny
piece of your program at a time. You want to make sure he can never get at
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.

Programmers are lulled into complacency by conventions. By every once in a
while, by subtly violating convention, you force him to read every line of
your code with a magnifying glass.

You might get the idea that every language feature makes code
unmaintainable -- not so, only if properly misused.

Naming

"When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said, in a rather scornful tone, "it
means just what I choose it to mean - neither more nor less."
- Lewis Carroll -- Through the Looking Glass, Chapter 6

Much of the skill in writing unmaintainable code is the art of naming
variables and methods. They don't matter at all to the compiler. That gives
you huge latitude to use them to befuddle the maintenance programmer.
New Uses For Names For Baby

Buy a copy of a baby naming book and you'll never be at a loss for variable
names. Fred is a wonderful name, and easy to type. If you're looking for
easy-to-type variable names, try adsf or aoeu if you type with a DSK
keyboard.
Single Letter Variable Names

If you call your variables a, b, c, then it will be impossible to search
for instances of them using a simple text editor. Further, nobody will be
able to guess what they are for. If anyone even hints at breaking the
tradition honoured since FØRTRAN of using i, j, and k for indexing
variables, namely replacing them with ii, jj and kk, warn them about what
the Spanish Inquisition did to heretics.
Creative Miss-spelling

If you must use descriptive variable and function names, misspell them. By
misspelling in some function and variable names, and spelling it correctly
in others (such as SetPintleOpening SetPintalClosing) we effectively negate
the use of grep or IDE search techniques. It works amazingly well. Add an
international flavor by spelling tory or tori in different
theatres/theaters.
Be Abstract

In naming functions and variables, 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.
A.C.R.O.N.Y.M.S.

Use acronyms to keep the code terse. Real men never define acronyms; they
understand them genetically.
Thesaurus Surrogatisation

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", "put ink on paper" and "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 an
unprofessional breach of the structured design principle of information
hiding.
Use Plural Forms From Other Languages

A VMS script kept track of the "statii" returned from various "Vaxen".
Esperanto , Klingon and Hobbitese qualify as languages for these purposes.
For pseudo-Esperanto pluraloj, add oj. You will be doing your part toward
world peace.
CapiTaliSaTion

Randomly capitalize the first letter of a syllable in the middle of a word.
For example ComputeRasterHistoGram().
Reuse Names

Wherever the rules of the language permit, give classes, constructors,
methods, member variables, parameters and local variables the same names.
For extra points, reuse local variable names inside {} blocks. The goal is
to force the maintenance programmer to carefully examine the scope of every
instance. In particular, in Java, make ordinary methods masquerade as
constructors.
Åccented Letters

Use accented characters on variable names. E.g.
typedef struct { int i; } ínt;
where the second ínt's í is actually i-acute. With only a simple text
editor, it's nearly impossible to distinguish the slant of the accent mark.
Exploit Compiler Name Length Limits

If the compiler will only distinguish the first, say, 8 characters of
names, then vary the endings e.g. var_unit_update() in one case and
var_unit_setup() in another. The compiler will treat both as var_unit.
Underscore, a Friend Indeed

Use _ and __ as identifiers.
Mix Languages

Randomly intersperse two languages (human or computer). If your boss
insists you use his language, tell him you can organise your thoughts
better in your own language, or, if that does not work, allege linguistic
discrimination and threaten to sue your employers for a vast sum.
Extended ASCII

Extended ASCII characters are perfectly valid as variable names, including
ß, Ð, and ñ characters. They are almost impossible to type without
copying/pasting in a simple text editor.
Names From Other Languages

Use foreign language dictionaries as a source for variable names. For
example, use the German punkt for point. Maintenance coders, without your
firm grasp of German, will enjoy the multicultural experience of
deciphering the meaning.
Names From Mathematics

Choose variable names that masquerade as mathematical operators, e.g.:
openParen = (slash + asterix) / equals;
Bedazzling Names

Choose variable names with irrelevant emotional connotation. e.g.:
marypoppins = (superman + starship) / god;
This confuses the reader because they have difficulty disassociating the
emotional connotations of the words from the logic they're trying to think
about.
Rename and Reuse

This trick works especially well in Ada, a language immune to many of the
standard obfuscation techniques. The people who originally named all the
objects and packages you use were morons. Rather than try to convince them
to change, just use renames and subtypes to rename everything to names of
your own devising. Make sure to leave a few references to the old names in,
as a trap for the unwary.
When To Use i

Never use i for the innermost loop variable. Use anything but. Use i
liberally for any other purpose especially for non-int variables. Similarly
use n as a loop index.
Conventions Schmentions

Ignore the Sun Java Coding Conventions, after all, Sun does. Fortunately,
the compiler won't tattle when you violate them. The goal is to come up
with names that differ subtlely only in case. If you are forced to use the
capitalisation conventions, you can still subvert wherever the choice is
ambigous, e.g. use both inputFilename and inputfileName. Invent your own
hopelessly complex naming conventions, then berate everyone else for not
following them.
Lower Case l Looks a Lot Like the Digit 1

Use lower case l to indicate long constants. e.g. 10l is more likely to be
mistaken for 101 that 10L is. Ban any fonts that clearly disambiguate uvw
wW gq9 2z 5s il17|!j oO08 `'" ;,. m nn rn {[()]}. Be creative.
Reuse of Global Names as Private

Declare a global array in module A, and a private one of the same name in
the header file for module B, so that it appears that it's the global array
you are using in module B, but it isn't. Make no reference in the comments
to this duplication.
Recycling Revisited

Use scoping as confusingly as possible by recycling variable names in
contradictory ways. For example, suppose you have global variables A and B,
and functions foo and bar. If you know that variable A will be regularly
passed to foo and B to bar, make sure to define the functions as function
foo(B) and function bar(A) so that inside the functions A will always be
referred to as B and vice versa. With more functions and globals, you can
create vast confusing webs of mutually contradictory uses of the same names.
Recycle Your Variables

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.
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.
Misleading names

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.
m_

a naming convention from the world of C++ is the use of "m_" in front of
members. This is supposed to help you tell them apart from methods, so long
as you forget that "method" also starts with the letter "m".
o_apple obj_apple

Use an "o" or "obj" prefix for each instance of the class to show that
you're thinking of the big, polymorphic picture.
Hungarian Notation

Hungarian Notation is the tactical nuclear weapon of source code
obfuscation techniques; use it! Due to the sheer volume of source code
contaminated by this idiom nothing can kill a maintenance engineer faster
than a well planned Hungarian Notation attack. The following tips will help
you corrupt the original intent of Hungarian Notation:
Insist on using "c" for const in C++ and other languages that directly
enforce the const-ness of a variable.
Seek out and use Hungarian warts that have meaning in languages other than
your current language. For example insist on the PowerBuilder "l_" and "a_
" {local and argument} scoping prefixes and always use the VB-esque style
of having a Hungarian wart for every control type when coding to C++. Try
to stay ignorant of the fact that megs of plainly visible MFC source code
does not use Hungarian warts for control types.

Always violate the Hungarian principle that the most commonly used
variables should carry the least extra information around with them.
Achieve this end through the techniques outlined above and by insisting
that each class type have a custom wart prefix. Never allow anyone to
remind you that no wart tells you that something is a class. The importance
of this rule cannot be overstated if you fail to adhere to its principles
the source code may become flooded with shorter variable names that have a
higher vowel/consonant ratio. In the worst case scenario this can lead to a
full collapse of obfuscation and the spontaneous reappearance of English
Notation in code!

Flagrantly violate the Hungarian-esque concept that function parameters and
other high visibility symbols must be given meaningful names, but that
Hungarian type warts all by themselves make excellent temporary variable
names.

Insist on carrying outright orthogonal information in your Hungarian warts.
Consider this real world example "a_crszkvc30LastNameCol". It took a team
of maintenance engineers nearly 3 days to figure out that this whopper
variable name described a const, reference, function argument that was
holding information from a database column of type Varchar[30] named
"LastName" which was part of the table's primary key. When properly
combined with the principle that "all variables should be public" this
technique has the power to render thousands of lines of source code
obsolete instantly!

Use to your advantage the principle that the human brain can only hold 7
pieces of information concurrently. For example code written to the above
standard has the following properties:

a single assignment statement carries 14 pieces of type and name
information.
a single function call that passes three parameters and assigns a result
carries 29 pieces of type and name information.
Seek to improve this excellent, but far too concise, standard. Impress
management and coworkers by recommending a 5 letter day of the week prefix
to help isolate code written on 'Monam' and 'FriPM'.
It is easy to overwhelm the short term memory with even a moderately
complex nesting structure, especially when the maintenance programmer can't
see the start and end of each block on screen simultaneously.
Hungarian Notation Revisited

One followon trick in the Hungarian notation is "change the type of a
variable but leave the variable name unchanged". This is almost invariably
done in windows apps with the migration from Win16 :- WndProc(HWND hW, WORD
wMsg, WORD wParam, LONG lParam) to Win32 WndProc(HWND hW, UINT wMsg, WPARAM
wParam, LPARAM lParam) where the w values hint that they are words, but
they really refer to longs. The real value of this approach comes clear
with the Win64 migration, when the parameters will be 64 bits wide, but the
old "w" and "l" prefixes will remain forever.
Reduce, Reuse, Recycle

If you have to define a structure to hold data for callbacks, always call
the structure PRIVDATA. Every module can define it's own PRIVDATA. In VC++,
this has the advantage of confusing the debugger so that if you have a
PRIVDATA variable and try to expand it in the watch window, it doesn't know
which PRIVDATA you mean, so it just picks one.
Obscure film references

Use constant names like LancelotsFavouriteColour instead of blue and assign
it hex value of $0204FB. The color looks identical to pure blue on the
screen, and a maintenance programmer would have to work out 0204FB (or use
some graphic tool) to know what it looks like. Only someone intimately
familiar with Monty Python and the Holy Grail would know that Lancelot's
favorite color was blue. If a maintenance programmer can't quote entire
Monty Python movies from memory, he or she has no business being a
programmer.
Camouflage

The longer it takes for a bug to surface, the harder it is to find.
- Roedy Green

Much of the skill in writing unmaintainable code is the art of camouflage,
hiding things, or making things appear to be what they are not. Many depend
on the fact the compiler is more capable at making fine distinctions than
either the human eye or the text editor. Here are some of the best
camouflaging techniques.
Code That Masquerades As Comments and Vice Versa

Include sections of code that is commented out but at first glance does not
appear to be.
for(j=0; j<array_len; j+ =8)
{
total += array[j+0 ];
total += array[j+1 ];
total += array[j+2 ]; /* Main body of
total += array[j+3]; * loop is unrolled
total += array[j+4]; * for greater speed.
total += array[j+5]; */
total += array[j+6 ];
total += array[j+7 ];
}
Without the colour coding would you notice that three lines of code are
commented out?
namespaces

Struct/union and typedef struct/union are different name spaces in C (not
in C++). Use the same name in both name spaces for structures or unions.
Make them, if possible, nearly compatible.
typedef struct {
char* pTr;
size_t lEn;
} snafu;
struct snafu {
unsigned cNt
char* pTr;
size_t lEn;
} A;
Hide Macro Definitions

Hide macro definitions in amongst rubbish comments. The programmer will get
bored and not finish reading the comments thus never discover the macro.
Ensure that the macro replaces what looks like a perfectly legitimate
assignment with some bizarre operation, a simple example:
#define a=b a=0-b
Look Busy

use define statements to make made up functions that simply comment out
their arguments, e.g.:
#define fastcopy(x,y,z) /*xyz*/
...
fastcopy(array1, array2, size); /* does nothing */
Use Continuation to hide variables

Instead of using
#define local_var xy_z
break up "xy_z" onto two lines:
#define local_var xy\
_z // local_var OK
That way a global search for xy_z will come up with nothing for that file.
To the C preprocessor, the "\" at the end of the line means glue this line
to the next one.
Arbitrary Names That Masquerade as Keywords

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.
Code Names Must Not Match Screen Names

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".
Don't Change Names

Instead of globally renaming to bring two sections of code into sync, use
multiple TYPEDEFs of the same symbol.
How to Hide Forbidden Globals

Since global variables are "evil", define a structure to hold all the
things you'd put in globals. Call it something clever like
EverythingYoullEverNeed. Make all functions take a pointer to this
structure (call it handle to confuse things more). This gives the
impression that you're not using global variables, you're accessing
everything through a "handle". Then declare one statically so that all the
code is using the same copy anyway.
Hide Instances With Synonyms

Maintenance programmers, in order to see if they'll be any cascading
effects to a change they make, do a global search for the variables named.
This can be defeated by this simple expedient of having synonyms, such as
#define xxx global_var // in file std.h
#define xy_z xxx // in file ..\other\substd.h
#define local_var xy_z // in file ..\codestd\inst.h
These defs should be scattered through different include-files. They are
especially effective if the include-files are located in different
directories. The other technique is to reuse a name in every scope. The
compiler can tell them apart, but a simple minded text searcher cannot.
Unfortunately SCIDs in the coming decade will make this simple technique
impossible. since the editor understands the scope rules just as well as
the compiler.
Long Similar Variable Names

Use very long variable names or class 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. In many fonts rn looks like an m. So how about a variable
swirnrner. Create variable names that differ from each other only in case
e.g. HashTable and Hashtable.
Similar-Sounding Similar-Looking Variable Names

Although we have one variable named xy_z, there's certainly no reason not
to have many other variables with similar names, such as xy_Z, xy__z,
_xy_z, _xyz, XY_Z, xY_z, and Xy_z.
Variables that resemble others except for capitalization and underlines
have the advantage of confounding those who like remembering names by sound
or letter-spelling, rather than by exact representations.

Overload and Bewilder

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.
Choosing The Best Overload Operator

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; Here is an example of elevating overloading operator
obfuscation to a high art. Overload the '!' operator for a class, but have
the overload have nothing to do with inverting or negating. Make it return
an integer. Then, in order to get a logical value for it, you must use '!
!'. However, this inverts the logic, so [drum roll] you must use '! ! !'.
Don't confuse the ! operator, which returns a boolean 0 or 1, with the ~
bitwise logical negation operator.
Overload new

Overload the "new" operator - much more dangerous than overloading the
+-/*. This can cause total havoc if overloaded to do something different
from it's original function (but vital to the object's function so it's
very difficult to change). This should ensure users trying to create a
dynamic instance get really stumped. You can combine this with the case
sensitivity trickalso have a member function, and variable called "New".
#define

#define in C++ deserves an entire essay on its own to explore its rich
possibilities for obfuscation. Use lower case #define variables so they
masquerade as ordinary variables. Never use parameters to your preprocessor
functions. Do everything with global #defines. One of the most imaginative
uses of the preprocessor I have heard of was requiring five passes through
CPP before the code was ready to compile. Through clever use of defines and
ifdefs, a master of obfuscation can make header files declare different
things depending on how many times they are included. This becomes
especially interesting when one header is included in another header. Here
is a particularly devious example:
#ifndef DONE

#ifdef TWICE

// put stuff here to declare 3rd time around
void g(char* str);
#define DONE

#else // TWICE
#ifdef ONCE

// put stuff here to declare 2nd time around
void g(void* str);
#define TWICE

#else // ONCE

// put stuff here to declare 1st time around
void g(std::string str);
#define ONCE

#endif // ONCE
#endif // TWICE
#endif // DONE
This one gets fun when passing g() a char*, because a different version of
g() will be called depending on how many times the header was included.
Compiler Directives

Compiler directives were designed with the express purpose of making the
same code behave completely differently. Turn the boolean short-circuiting
directive on and off repeatedly and vigourously, as well as the long
strings directive.
Documentation

Any fool can tell the truth, but it requires a man of some sense to know
how to lie well.
- Samuel Butler (1835 - 1902)
Incorrect documentation is often worse than no documentation.
- Bertrand Meyer
Since the computer ignores comments and documentation, you can lie
outrageously and do everything in your power to befuddle the poor
maintenance programmer.
Lie in the comments

You don't have to actively lie, just fail to keep comments as up to date
with the code.
Document the obvious

Pepper the code with comments like /* add 1 to i */ however, never document
wooly stuff like the overall purpose of the package or method.
Document How Not Why

Document only the details of what a program does, not what it is attempting
to accomplish. That way, if there is a bug, the fixer will have no clue
what the code should be doing.
Avoid Documenting the "Obvious"

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.
On the Proper Use Of Documentation Templates

Consider function documentation prototypes used to allow automated
documentation of the code. These prototypes should be copied from one
function (or method or class) to another, but never fill in the fields. If
for some reason you are forced to fill in the fields make sure that all
parameters are named the same for all functions, and all cautions are the
same but of course not related to the current function at all.
On the Proper Use of Design Documents

When implementing a very complicated algorithm, use the classic software
engineering principles of doing a sound design before beginning coding.
Write an extremely detailed design document that describes each step in a
very complicated algorithm. The more detailed this document is, the better.
In fact, the design doc should break the algorithm down into a hierarchy of
structured steps, described in a hierarchy of auto-numbered individual
paragraphs in the document. Use headings at least 5 deep. Make sure that
when you are done, you have broken the structure down so completely that
there are over 500 such auto-numbered paragraphs. For example, one
paragraph might be(this is a real example)

1.2.4.6.3.13 - Display all impacts for activity where selected mitigations
can apply (short pseudocode omitted).

then... (and this is the kicker) when you write the code, for each of these
paragraphs you write a corresponding global function named:

Act1_2_4_6_3_13()
Do not document these functions. After all, that's what the design document
is for!
Since the design doc is auto-numbered, it will be extremely difficult to
keep it up to date with changes in the code (because the function names, of
course, are static, not auto-numbered.) This isn't a problem for you
because you will not try to keep the document up to date. In fact, do
everything you can to destroy all traces of the document.

Those who come after you should only be able to find one or two
contradictory, early drafts of the design document hidden on some dusty
shelving in the back room near the dead 286 computers.

Units of Measure

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.
Gotchas

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 in the movie Bambi "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. An anonymous comment that
says "This needs to be fixed!" can do wonders, especially if it's not clear
what the comment refers to. Keep it vague, and nobody will feel personally
criticised.
Documenting Variables

Never put a comment on a variable declaration. 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
declaration, not even a temporary!
Disparage In the Comments

Discourage any attempt to use external maintenance contractors by peppering
your code with insulting references to other leading software companies,
especial anyone who might be contracted to do the work. e.g.:
/* The optimised inner loop.
This stuff is too clever for the dullard at Software Services Inc., who
would
probably use 50 times as memory & time using the dumb routines in <math.h>.
*/
class clever_SSInc
{
.. .
}
If possible, put insulting stuff in syntactically significant parts of the
code, as well as just the comments so that management will probably break
the code if they try to sanitise it before sending it out for maintenance.
COMMENT AS IF IT WERE CØBØL ON PUNCH CARDS

Always refuse to accept advances in the development environment arena,
especially SCIDs. Disbelieve rumors that all function and variable
declarations are never more than one click away and always assume that code
developed in Visual Studio 6.0 will be maintained by someone using edlin or
vi. Insist on Draconian commenting rules to bury the source code proper.
Monty Python Comments

On a method called makeSnafucated insert only the JavaDoc /* make
snafucated */. Never define what snafucated means anywhere. Only a fool
does not already know, with complete certainty, what snafucated means. For
classic examples of this technique, consult the Sun AWT JavaDOC.
Program Design

The cardinal rule of writing unmaintainable code is to specify each fact in
as many places as possible and in as many ways as possible.
- Roedy Green
The key to writing maintainable code is to specify each fact about the
application in only one place. To change your mind, you need change it in
only one place, and you are guaranteed the entire program will still work.
Therefore, the key to writing unmaintainable code is to specify a fact over
and over, in as many places as possible, in as many variant ways as
possible. Happily, languages like Java go out of their way to make writing
this sort of unmaintainable code easy. For example, it is almost impossible
to change the type of a widely used variable because all the casts and
conversion functions will no longer work, and the types of the associated
temporary variables will no longer be appropriate. Further, if the variable
is displayed on the screen, all the associated display and data entry code
has to be tracked down and manually modified. The Algol family of languages
which include C and Java treat storing data in an array, Hashtable, flat
file and database with totally different syntax. In languages like
Abundance, and to some extent Smalltalk, the syntax is identical; just the
declaration changes. Take advantage of Java's ineptitude. Put data you know
will grow too large for RAM, for now into an array. That way the
maintenance programmer will have a horrendous task converting from array to
file access later. Similarly place tiny files in databases so the
maintenance programmer can have the fun of converting them to array access
when it comes time to performance tune.
Java Casts

Java's casting scheme is a gift from the Gods. You can use it without guilt
since the language requires it. Every time you retrieve an object from a
Collection you must cast it back to its original type. Thus the type of the
variable may be specified in dozens of places. If the type later changes,
all the casts must be changed to match. The compiler may or may not detect
if the hapless maintenance programmer fails to catch them all (or changes
one too many). In a similar way, all matching casts to (short) need to be
changed to (int) if the type of a variable changes from short to int. There
is a movement afoot in invent a generic cast operator (cast) and a generic
conversion operator (convert) that would require no maintenance when the
type of variable changes. Make sure this heresy never makes it into the
language specification. Vote no on RFE 114691 and on genericity which would
eliminate the need for many casts.
Exploit Java's Redundancy

Java insists you specify the type of every variable twice. Java programmers
are so used to this redundancy they won't notice if you make the two types
slightly different, as in this example:
Bubblegum b = new Bubblegom();
Unfortunately the popularity of the ++ operator makes it harder to get away
with pseudo-redundant code like this:
swimmer = swimner + 1;
Never Validate

Never check input data for any kind of correctness or discrepancies. It
will demonstrate that you absolutely trust the company's equipment as well
as that you are a perfect team player who trusts all project partners and
system operators. Always return reasonable values even when data inputs are
questionable or erroneous.
Be polite, Never Assert

Avoid the assert() mechanism, because it could turn a three-day debug fest
into a ten minute one.
Avoid Encapsulation

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.
Clone & Modify

In the name of efficiency, use cut/paste/clone/modify. This works much
faster than using many small reusable modules. This is especially useful in
shops that measure your progress by the number of lines of code you've
written.
Use Static Arrays

If a module in a library needs an array to hold an image, just define a
static array. Nobody will ever have an image bigger than 512 x 512, so a
fixed-size array is OK. For best precision, make it an array of doubles.
Bonus effect for hiding a 2 Meg static array which causes the program to
exceed the memory of the client's machine and thrash like crazy even if
they never use your routine.
Dummy Interfaces

Write an empty interface called something like "WrittenByMe", and make all
of your classes implement it. Then, write wrapper classes for any of Java's
built-in classes that you use. The idea is to make sure that every single
object in your program implements this interface. Finally, write all
methods so that both their arguments and return types are WrittenByMe. This
makes it nearly impossible to figure out what some methods do, and
introduces all sorts of entertaining casting requirements. For a further
extension, have each team member have his/her own personal interface (e.g.,
WrittenByJoe); any class worked on by a programmer gets to implement
his/her interface. You can then arbitrary refer to objects by any one of a
large number of meaningless interfaces!
Giant Listeners

Never create separate Listeners for each Component. Always have one
listener for every button in your project and simply use massive if...else
statements to test for which button was pressed.
Too Much Of A Good ThingTM

Go wild with encapsulation and oo. For example:
myPanel.add( getMyButton() );
private JButton getMyButton()
{
return myButton;
}
That one probably did not even seem funny. Don't worry. It will some day.
Friendly Friend

Use as often as possible the friend-declaration in C++. Combine this with
handing the pointer of the creating class to a created class. Now you don't
need to fritter away your time in thinking about interfaces. Additionally
you should use the keywords private and protected to prove that your
classes are well encapsulated.
Use Three Dimensional Arrays

Lots of them. Move data between the arrays in convoluted ways, say, filling
the columns in arrayB with the rows from arrayA. Doing it with an offset of
1, for no apparent reason, is a nice touch. Makes the maintenance
programmer nervous.
Mix and Match

Use both accessor methods and public variables. That way, you can change an
object's variable without the overhead of calling the accessor, but still
claim that the class is a "Java Bean". This has the additional advantage of
frustrating the maintenence programmer who adds a logging function to try
to figure out who is changing the value.
Wrap, wrap, wrap

Whenever you have to use methods in code you did not write, insulate your
code from that other dirty code by at least one layer of wrapper. After
all, the other author might some time in the future recklessly rename every
method. Then where would you be? You could of course, if he did such a
thing, insulate your code from the changes by writing a wrapper or you
could let VAJ handle the global rename. However, this is the perfect excuse
to preemptively cut him off at the pass with a wrapper layer of
indirection, before he does anything idiotic. One of Java's main faults is
that there is no way to solve many simple problems without dummy wrapper
methods that do nothing but call another method of the same name, or a
closely related name. This means it is possible to write wrappers
four-levels deep that do absolutely nothing, and almost no one will notice.
To maximise the obscuration, at each level, rename the methods, selecting
random synonyms from a thesaurus. This gives the illusion something of note
is happening. Further, the renaming helps ensure the lack of consistent
project terminology. To ensure no one attempts to prune your levels back to
a reasonable number, invoke some of your code bypassing the wrappers at
each of the levels.
Wrap Wrap Wrap Some More

Make sure all API functions are wrapped at least 6-8 times, with function
definitions in separate source files. Using #defines to make handy
shortcuts to these functions also helps.
No Secrets!

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.
The Kama Sutra

This 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 and sit back and wait for it the copies to gradually
get out of sync.
Permute and Baffle

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.
Theme and Variations

Instead of using a parameter 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.
Static Is Good

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.
Cargill's Quandry

Take advantage of Cargill's quandary (I think this was his) "any design
problem can be solved by adding an additional level of indirection, except
for too many levels of indirection." Decompose OO programs until it becomes
nearly impossible to find a method which actually updates program state.
Better yet, arrange all such occurrences to be activated as callbacks from
by traversing pointer forests which are known to contain every function
pointer used within the entire system. Arrange for the forest traversals to
be activated as side-effects from releasing reference counted objects
previously created via deep copies which aren't really all that deep.
Packratting

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.
And That's Final

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.
Eschew The Interface

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! If an interface is
unavoidable, make an all-purpose one and name it something like
"ImplementableIface." Another gem from academia is to append "Impl" to the
names of classes that implement interfaces. This can be used to great
advantage, e.g. with classes that implement Runnable.
Avoid Layouts

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.
Environment variables

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!
Table Driven Logic

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.
Modify Mom's Fields

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.
The Magic Of Global Variables

Instead of using exceptions to handle error processing, have your error
message routine set a global variable. Then make sure that every
long-running loop in the system checks this global flag and terminates if
an error occurs. Add another global variable to signal when a user presses
the 'reset' button. Of course all the major loops in the system also have
to check this second flag. Hide a few loops that don't terminate on demand.
Globals, We Can't Stress These Enough!

If God didn't want us to use global variables, he wouldn't have invented
them. Rather than disappoint God, use and set as many global variables as
possible. Each function should use and set at least two of them, even if
there's no reason to do this. After all, any good maintenance programmer
will soon figure out this is an exercise in detective work, and she'll be
happy for the exercise that separates real maintenance programmers from the
dabblers.
Globals, One More Time, Boys

Global variables save you from having to specify arguments in functions.
Take full advantage of this. Elect one or more of these global variables to
specify what kinds of processes to do on the others. Maintenance
programmers foolishly assume that C functions will not have side effects.
Make sure they squirrel results and internal state information away in
global variables.
Side Effects

In C, functions are supposed to be idempotent, (without side effects). I
hope that hint is sufficient.
Backing Out

Within the body of a loop, assume that the loop action is successful and
immediately update all pointer variables. If an exception is later detected
on that loop action, back out the pointer advancements as side effects of a
conditional expression following the loop body.
Local Variables

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.
Reduce, Reuse, Recycle

If you have to define a structure to hold data for callbacks, always call
the structure PRIVDATA. Every module can define it's own PRIVDATA. In VC++,
this has the advantage of confusing the debugger so that if you have a
PRIVDATA variable and try to expand it in the watch window, it doesn't know
which PRIVDATA you mean, so it just picks one.
Configuration Files

These usually have the form keyword=value. The values are loaded into Java
variables at load time. The most obvious obfuscation technique is to use
slightly different names for the keywords and the Java variables. Use
configuration files even for constants that never change at run time.
Parameter file variables require at least five times as much code to
maintain as a simple variable would.
Bloated classes

To ensure your classes are bounded in the most obtuse way possible, make
sure you include peripheral, obscure methods and attributes in every class.
For example, a class that defines astrophysical orbit geometry really
should have a method that computes ocean tide schedules and attributes that
comprise a Crane weather model. Not only does this over-define the class,
it makes finding these methods in the general system code like looking for
a guitar pick in a landfill.
Subclass With Abandon

Object oriented programming is a godsend for writing unmaintainable code.
If you have a class with 10 properties (member/method) in it, consider a
base class with only one property and subclassing it 9 levels deep so that
each descendant adds one property. By the time you get to the last
descendant class, you'll have all 10 properties. If possible, put each
class declaration in a separate file. This has the added effect of bloating
your INCLUDE or USES statements, and forces the maintainer to open that
many more files in his or her editor. Make sure you create at least one
instance of each subclass.
Coding Obfuscation

Sedulously eschew obfuscatory hyperverbosity and prolixity.
Obfuscated C

Follow the obfuscated C contests on the Internet and sit at the lotus feet
of the masters.
Find a Forth or APL Guru

In those worlds, the terser your code and the more bizarre the way it
works, the more you are revered.
I'll Take a Dozen

Never use one housekeeping variable when you could just as easily use two
or three.
Jude the Obscure

Always look for the most obscure way to do common tasks. For example,
instead of using arrays to convert an integer to the corresponding string,
use code like this:
char *p;
switch (n)
{
case 1:
    p = "one";
    if (0)
case 2:
    p = "two";
    if (0)
case 3:
    p = "three";
    printf("%s", p);
    break;
}
Foolish Consistency Is the Hobgoblin of Little Minds

When you need a character constant, use many different formats ' ', 32,
0x20, 040. Make liberal use of the fact that 10 and 010 are not the same
number in C or Java.
Casting

Pass all data as a void * and then typecast to the appropriate structure.
Using byte offsets into the data instead of structure casting is fun too.
The Nested Switch

(a switch within a switch) is the most difficult type of nesting for the
human mind to unravel.
Exploit Implicit Conversion

Memorize all of the subtle implicit conversion rules in the programming
language. Take full advantage of them. Never use a picture variable (in
COBOL or PL/I) or a general conversion routine (such as sprintf in C). Be
sure to use floating-point variables as indexes into arrays, characters as
loop counters, and perform string functions on numbers. After all, all of
these operations are well-defined and will only add to the terseness of
your source code. Any maintainer who tries to understand them will be very
grateful to you because they will have to read and learn the entire chapter
on implicit data type conversion; a chapter that they probably had
completely overlooked before working on your programs.
Raw ints

When using ComboBoxes, use a switch statement with integer cases rather
than named constants for the possible values.
Semicolons!

Always use semicolons whenever they are syntactically allowed. For example:
if(a);
else;
{
int d;
d = c;
}
;
Use Octal

Smuggle octal literals into a list of decimal numbers like this:
array = new int []
{
111,
120,
013,
121,
};
Convert Indirectly

Java offers great opportunity for obfuscation whenever you have to 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. You get bonus points for every extra temporary object you leave
littering the heap after your conversion.
Nesting

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.
If they span several lines, so much the better.
Numeric Literals

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. If the maintenance programmer has to change the length of one of
them, he will have to decipher every use of the literal 100 in the program
to determine which array it applies to. He is almost sure to make at least
one error, hopefully one that won't show up for years later.

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.

C's Eccentric View Of Arrays

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. To really disguise things, generate the index with a
function:
int myfunc(int q, int p) { return p%q; }
...
myfunc(6291, 8)[Array];

Unfortunately, these techniques can only be used in native C classes, not
Java.

L o n g   L i n e s

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. Tipremove 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.
Exceptions

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 actually throw any
exceptions or not.
When To Use Exceptions

Use exceptions for non-exceptional conditions. Routinely terminate loops
with an ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException. Pass return standard results from a
method in an exception.
Use threads With Abandon

title says it all.
Lawyer Code

Follow the language lawyer discussions in the newsgroups about what various
bits of tricky code should do e.g. a=a++; or f(a++,a++); then sprinkle your
code liberally with the examples. In C, the effects of pre/post decrement
code such as
*++b ? (*++b + *(b-1)) 0
are not defined by the language spec. Every compiler is free to evaluate in
a different order. This makes them doubly deadly. Similarly, take advantage
of the complex tokenising rules of C and Java by removing all spaces.
Early Returns

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.
Avoid {}

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. For best results with this
technique, use Perl. You can pepper the code with additional ifs after the
statements, to amazing effect.
Tabs From Hell

Never underestimate how much havoc you can create by indenting with tabs
instead of spaces, especially when there is no corporate standard on how
much indenting a tab represents. Embed tabs inside string literals, or use
a tool to convert spaces to tabs that will do that for you.
Magic Matrix Locations

Use special values in certain matrix locations as flags. A good choice is
the [3][0] element in a transformation matrix used with a homogeneous
coordinate system.
Magic Array Slots revisited

If you need several variables of a given type, just define an array of
them, then access them by number. Pick a numbering convention that only you
know and don't document it. And don't bother to define #define constants
for the indexes. Everybody should just know that the global variable
widget[15] is the cancel button. This is just an up-to-date variant on
using absolute numerical addresses in assembler code.
Never Beautify

Never use an automated source code tidier (beautifier) to keep your code
aligned. Lobby to have them banned them from your company on the grounds
they create false deltas in PVCS/CVS (version control tracking) or that
every programmer should have his own indenting style held forever
sacrosanct for any module he wrote. Insist that other programmers observe
those idiosyncratic conventions in "his " modules. Banning beautifiers 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 also 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;
The Macro Preprocessor

It 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.
Exploit Schizophrenia

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 notationse.g.
byte[ ] rowvector, colvector , matrix[ ];
which is equivalent to:
byte[ ] rowvector;
byte[ ] colvector;
byte[ ][] matrix;
Hide Error Recovery Code

Use nesting to put the error recovery for a function call as far as
possible away from the call. This simple example can be elaborated to 10 or
12 levels of nest:
if ( function_A() == OK )
{
if ( function_B() == OK )
{
/* Normal completion stuff */
}
else
{
/* some error recovery for Function_B */
}
}
else
{
/* some error recovery for Function_A */
}
Pseudo C

The real reason for #define was to help programmers who are familiar with
another programming language to switch to C. Maybe you will find
declarations like #define begin { " or " #define end } useful to write more
interesting code.
Confounding Imports

Keep the maintenance programmer guessing about what packages the methods
you are using are in. Instead of:
import MyPackage.Read;
import MyPackage.Write;
use:
import Mypackage. *;
Never fully qualify any method or class no matter how obscure. Let the
maintenance programmer guess which of the packages/classes it belongs to.
Of course, inconsistency in when you fully qualify and how you do your
imports helps most.
Toilet Tubing

Never under any circumstances allow the code from more than one function or
procedure to appear on the screen at once. To achieve this with short
routines, use the following handy tricks:
Blank lines are generally used to separate logical blocks of code. Each
line is a logical block in and of itself. Put blank lines between each line.
Never comment your code at the end of a line. Put it on the line above. If
you're forced to comment at the end of the line, pick the longest line of
code in the entire file, add 10 spaces, and left-align all end-of-line
comments to that column.

Comments at the top of procedures should use templates that are at least 15
lines long and make liberal use of blank lines. Here's a handy template:
/*
/* Procedure Name:
/*
/* Original procedure name:
/*
/* Author:
/*
/* Date of creation:
/*
/* Dates of modification:
/*
/* Modification authors:
/*
/* Original file name:
/*
/* Purpose:
/*
/* Intent:
/*
/* Designation:
/*
/* Classes used:
/*
/* Constants:
/*
/* Local variables:
/*
/* Parameters:
/*
/* Date of creation:
/*
/* Purpose:
*/

The technique of putting so much redundant information in documentation
almost guarantees it will soon go out of date, and will help befuddle
maintenance programmers foolish enough to trust it.
Testing

I don't need to test my programs. I have an error-correcting modem.
- Om I. Baud

Leaving bugs in your programs gives the maintenance programmer who comes
along later something interesting to do. A well done bug should leave
absolutely no clue as to when it was introduced or where. The laziest way
to accomplish this is simply never to test your code.
Never Test

Never test any code that handles the error cases, machine crashes, or OS
glitches. Never check return codes from the OS. That code never gets
executed anyway and slows down your test times. Besides, how can you
possibly test your code to handle disk errors, file read errors, OS
crashes, and all those sorts of events? Why, you would have to either an
incredibly unreliable computer or a test scaffold that mimicked such a
thing. Modern hardware never fails, and who wants to write code just for
testing purposes? It isn't any fun. If users complain, just blame the OS or
hardware. They'll never know.
Never, Ever Do Any Performance Testing

Hey, if it isn't fast enough, just tell the customer to buy a faster
machine. If you did do performance testing, you might find a bottleneck,
which might lead to algorithm changes, which might lead to a complete
redesign of your product. Who wants that? Besides, performance problems
that crop up at the customer site mean a free trip for you to some exotic
location. Just keep your shots up-to-date and your passport handy.
Never Write Any Test Cases

Never perform code coverage or path coverage testing. Automated testing is
for wimps. Figure out which features account for 90% of the uses of your
routines, and allocate 90% of the tests to those paths. After all, this
technique probably tests only about 60% of your source code, and you have
just saved yourself 40% of the test effort. This can help you make up the
schedule on the back-end of the project. You'll be long gone by the time
anyone notices that all those nice "marketing features" don't work. The
big, famous software companies test code this way; so should you. And if
for some reason, you are still around, see the next item.
Testing is for cowards

A brave coder will bypass that step. Too many programmers are afraid of
their boss, afraid of losing their job, afraid of customer hate mail and
afraid of being sued. This fear paralyzes action, and reduces productivity.
Studies have shown that eliminating the test phase means that managers can
set ship dates well in advance, an obvious aid in the planning process.
With fear gone, innovation and experimentation can blossom. The role of the
programmer is to produce code, and debugging can be done by a cooperative
effort on the part of the help desk and the legacy maintenance group.
If we have full confidence in our coding ability, then testing will be
unnecessary. If we look at this logically, then any fool can recognise that
testing does not even attempt to solve a technical problem, rather, this is
a problem of emotional confidence. A more efficient solution to this lack
of confidence issue is to eliminate testing completely and send our
programmers to self-esteem courses. After all, if we choose to do testing,
then we have to test every program change, but we only need to send the
programmers to one course on building self-esteem. The cost benefit is as
amazing as it is obvious.

Ensuring It Only Works In Debug Mode

If you've defined TESTING as 1
#define TESTING 1
this gives you the wonderful opportunity to have separate code sections,
such as
#if TESTING==1
#endif
which can contain such indispensable tidbits as
x = rt_val;
so that if anyone resets TESTING to 0, the program won't work. And with the
tiniest bit of imaginative work, it will not only befuddle the logic, but
confound the compiler as well.
Choice Of Language

Philosophy is a battle against the bewitchment of our intelligence by means
of language.
- Ludwig Wittgenstein
Computer languages are gradually evolving to become more fool proof. Using
state of the art languages is unmanly. Insist on using the oldest language
you can get away with, octal machine language if you can (Like Hans und
Frans, I am no girlie man; I am so virile I used to code by plugging gold
tipped wires into a plugboard of IBM unit record equipment (punch cards),
or by poking holes in paper tape with a hand punch), failing that
assembler, failing that FORTRAN or COBOL, failing that C, and BASIC,
failing that C++.

FØRTRAN

Write all your code in FORTRAN. If your boss ask why, you can reply that
there are lots of very useful libraries that you can use thus saving time.
However the chances of writing maintainable code in FORTRAN are zero, and
therefore following the unmaintainable coding guidelines is a lot easier.
Avoid Ada

About 20% of these techniques can't be used in Ada. Refuse to use Ada. If
your manager presses you, insist that no-one else uses it, and point out
that it doesn't work with your large suite of tools like lint and plummer
that work around C's failings.
Use ASM

Convert all common utility functions into asm.
Use QBASIC

Leave all important library functions written in QBASIC, then just write an
asm wrapper to handle the large->medium memory model mapping.
Inline Assembler

Sprinkle your code with bits of inline assembler just for fun. Almost no
one understands assembler anymore. Even a few lines of it can stop a
maintenance programmer cold.
MASM call C

If you have assembler modules which are called from C, try to call C back
from the assembler as often as possible, even if it's only for a trivial
purpose and make sure you make full use of the goto, bcc and other charming
obfuscations of assembler.
Avoid Maintainability Tools

Avoid coding in Abundance, or using any of its principles kludged into
other languages. It was designed from the ground up with the primary goal
of making the maintenance programmer's job easier. Similarly avoid Eiffel
or Ada since they were designed to catch bugs before a program goes into
production.
Dealing With Others

Hell is other people.
- Jean-Paul Sartre, No Exit, 1934

There are many hints sprinkled thoroughout the tips above on how to rattle
maintenance programmers though frustration, and how to foil your boss's
attempts to stop you from writing unmaintainable code, or even how to
foment an RWAR that involves everyone on the topic of how code should be
formatted in the repository.
Your Boss Knows Best

If your boss thinks that his or her 20 year old FORTRAN experience is an
excellent guide to contemporary programming, rigidly follow all his or her
recommendations. As a result, the boss will trust you. That may help you in
your career. You will learn many new methods to obfuscate program code.
Subvert The Help Desk

One way to help ensure the code is full of bugs is to ensure the
maintenance programmers never hear about them. This requires subverting the
help desk. Never answer the phone. Use an automated voice that says "thank
you for calling the helpline. To reach a real person press "1" or leave a
voice mail wait for the tone". Email help requests should be ignored other
than to assign them a tracking number. The standard response to any problem
is " I think your account is locked out. The person able to authorise
reinstatement is not available just now."
Keep Your Mouth Shut

Be never vigilant of the next Y2K. If you ever spot something that could
sneak up on a fixed deadline and destroy all life in the western hemisphere
then do not openly discuss it until we are under the critical 4 year event
window of panic and opportunity. Do not tell friends, coworkers, or other
competent people of your discovery. Under no circumstances attempt to
publish anything that might hint at this new and tremendously profitable
threat. Do send one normal priority, jargon encrypted, memo to upper
management to cover-your-a$$. If at all possible attach the jargon
encrypted information as a rider on an otherwise unrelated plain-text memo
pertaining to a more immediately pressing business concern. Rest assured
that we all see the threat too. Sleep sound at night knowing that long
after you've been forced into early retirement you will be begged to come
back at a logarithmically increased hourly rate!
Baffle 'Em With Bullshit

Subtlety is a wonderful thing, although sometimes a sledge-hammer is more
subtle than other tools. So, a refinement on misleading comments create
classes with names like FooFactory containing comments with references to
the GoF creational patterns (ideally with http links to bogus UML design
documents) that have nothing to do with object creation. Play off the
maintainer's delusions of competence. More subtly, create Java classes with
protected constructors and methods like Foo f = Foo.newInstance()that
return actual new instances, rather than the expected singleton. The
opportunities for side-effects are endless.
Book Of The Month Club

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.
Roll Your Own

You've always wanted to write system level code. Now is your chance. Ignore
the standard libraries and write your own. It will look great on your
resumé.
Roll Your Own BNF

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.
Roll Your Own Allocator

Everyone knows that debugging your dynamic storage is complicated and time
consuming. Instead of making sure each class has no storage leaks, reinvent
your own storage allocator. It just mallocs space out of a big arena.
Instead of freeing storage, force your users to periodically perform a
system reset that clears the heap. There's only a few things the system
needs to keep track of across resets -- lots easier than plugging all the
storage leaks; and so long as the users remember to periodically reset the
system, they'll never run out of heap space. Imagine them trying to change
this strategy once deployed!
Tricks In Offbeat Languages

Programming in Basic causes brain damage.
- Edsger Wybe Dijkstra
SQL Aliasing

Alias table names to one or two letters. Better still alias them to the
names of other unrelated existing tables.
SQL Outer Join

Mix the various flavours of outer join syntax just to keep everyone on
their toes.
JavaScript Scope

"Optimise" JavaScript code taking advantage of the fact a function can
access all local variables in the scope of the caller.
Visual Basic Declarations

Instead of:
dim Count_num as string
dim Color_var as string
dim counter as integer
use:
Dim Count_num$, Color_var$, counter%
Visual Basic Madness

If reading from a text file, read 15 characters more than you need to then
embed the actual text string like so:
ReadChars = .ReadChars (29,0)
ReadChar = trim(left(mid(ReadChar,len(ReadChar)-15,len(ReadChar)-5),7))
If ReadChars = "alongsentancewithoutanyspaces"
Mid,14,24 = "withoutanys"
and left,5 = "without"
Delphi/Pascal Only

Don't use functions and procedures. Use the label/goto statements then jump
around a lot inside your code using this. It'll drive 'em mad trying to
trace through this. Another idea, is just to use this for the hang of it
and scramble your code up jumping to and fro in some haphazard fashion.
Perl

Use trailing if's and unless's especially at the end of really long lines.
Lisp

LISP is a dream language for the writer of unmaintainable code. Consider
these baffling fragments:
(lambda (*<8-]= *<8-[= ) (or *<8-]= *<8-[= ))
(defun :-] (<) (= < 2))

(defun !(!)(if(and(funcall(lambda(!)(if(and '(< 0)(< ! 2))1 nil))(1+ !))
(not(null '(lambda(!)(if(< 1 !)t nil)))))1(* !(!(1- !)))))

Visual Foxpro

This one is specific to Visual Foxpro. A variable is undefined and can't be
used unless you assign a value to it. This is what happens when you check a
variable's type:
lcx = TYPE('somevariable')
The value of lcx will be 'U' or undefined. BUT if you assign scope to the
variable it sort of defines it and makes it a logical FALSE. Neat, huh!?
LOCAL lcx
lcx = TYPE('somevariable')
The value of lcx is now 'L' or logical. It is further defined the value of
FALSE. Just imagine the power of this in writing unmaintainable code.
LOCAL lc_one, lc_two, lc_three... , lc_n
IF lc_one
DO some_incredibly_complex_operation_that_will_neverbe_executed WITH
make_sure_to_pass_parameters
ENDIF

IF lc_two
DO some_incredibly_complex_operation_that_will_neverbe_executed WITH
make_sure_to_pass_parameters
ENDIF

PROCEDURE some_incredibly_complex_oper....
* put tons of code here that will never be executed
* why not cut and paste your main procedure!
ENDIF

Miscellaneous Techniques

If you give someone a program, you will frustrate them for a day; if you
teach them how to program, you will frustrate them for a lifetime.
- Anonymous

Don't Recompile

Let's start off with probably the most fiendish technique ever devised:
Compile the code to an executable. If it works, then just make one or two
small little changes in the source code...in each module. But don't bother
recompiling these. You can do that later when you have more time, and when
there's time for debugging. When the hapless maintenance programmer years
later makes a change and the code no longer works, she will erroneously
assume it must be something she recently changed. You will send her off on
a wild goose chase that will keep her busy for weeks.
Foiling Debuggers

A very simple way to confound people trying to understand your code by
tracing it with a line debugger, is to make the lines long. In particular,
put the then clause on the same line as the if. They can't place
breakpoints. They can't tell which branch of an if was taken.
S.I. vs American Measure

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!
CANI

Constant And Never-ending Improvement. 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?
About Box

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.
Ch ch ch Changes

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.
Put C Prototypes In Individual Files

instead of common headers. This has the dual advantage of requiring a
change in parameter data type to be maintained in every file, and avoids
any chance that the compiler or linker will detect type mismatches. This
will be especially helpful when porting from 32 -> 64 bit platforms.
No Skill Required

You don't need great skill to write unmaintainable code. Just leap in and
start coding. Keep in mind that management still measures productivity in
lines of code even if you have to delete most of it later.
Carry Only One Hammer

Stick with what you know and travel light; if you only carry a hammer then
all problems are nails.
Standards Schmandards

Whenever possible ignore the coding standards currently in use by thousands
of developers in your project's target language and environment. For
example insist on STL style coding standards when writing an MFC based
application.
Reverse the Usual True False Convention

Reverse the usual definitions of true and false. Sounds very obvious but it
works great. You can hide:
#define TRUE 0
#define FALSE 1
somewhere deep in the code so that it is dredged up from the bowels of the
program from some file that noone ever looks at anymore. Then force the
program to do comparisons like:
if ( var == TRUE )
if ( var != FALSE )
someone is bound to "correct" the apparent redundancy, and use var
elsewhere in the usual way:
if ( var )
Another technique is to make TRUE and FALSE have the same value, though
most would consider that out and out cheating. Using values 1 and 2 or -1
and 0 is a more subtle way to trip people up and still look respectable.
You can use this same technique in Java by defining a static constant
called TRUE. Programmers might be more suspicious you are up to no good
since there is a built-in literal true in Java.
Third Party Libraries

Include powerful third party libraries in your project and then don't use
them. With practice you can remain completely ignorant of good tools and
add the unused tools to your resumé in your "Other Tools" section.
Avoid Libraries

Feign ignorance of libraries that are directly included with your
development tool. If coding in Visual C++ ignore the presence of MFC or the
STL and code all character strings and arrays by hand; this helps keep your
pointer skills sharp and it automatically foils any attempts to extend the
code.
Create a Build Order

Make it so elaborate that no maintainer could ever get any of his or her
fixes to compile. Keep secret SmartJ which renders make scripts almost
obsolete. Similarly, keep secret that the javac compiler is also available
as a class. On pain of death, never reveal how easy it is to write and
maintain a speedy little custom java program to find the files and do the
make that directly invokes the sun.tools.javac.Main compile class.
More Fun With Make

Have the makefile-generated-batch-file copy source files from multiple
directories with undocumented overrwrite rules. This permits code branching
without the need for any fancy source code control system, and stops your
successors ever finding out which version of DoUsefulWork() is the one they
should edit.
Collect Coding Standards

Find all the tips you can on writing maintainable code such as the Square
Box Suggestions and flagrantly violate them.
IDE, Not Me!

Put all the code in the makefileyour successors will be really impressed
how you managed to write a makefile which generates a batch file that
generates some header files and then builds the app, such that they can
never tell what effects a change will have, or be able to migrate to a
modern IDE. For maximum effect use an obsolete make tool, such as an early
brain dead version of NMAKE without the notion of dependencies.
Bypassing Company Coding Standards

Some companies have a strict policy of no numeric literals; you must use
named constants. It is fairly easy to foil the intent of this policy. For
example, one clever C++ programmer wrote:
#define K_ONE 1
#define K_TWO 2
#define K_THOUSAND 999
Compiler Warnings

Be sure to leave in some compiler warnings. Use the handy "-" prefix in
make to suppress the failure of the make due to any and all compiler
errors. This way, if a maintenance programmer carelessly inserts an error
into your source code, the make tool will nonetheless try to rebuild the
entire package; it might even succeed! And any programmer who compiles your
code by hand will think that they have broken some existing code or header
when all that has really happened is that they have stumbled across your
harmless warnings. They will again be grateful to you for the enjoyment of
the process that they will have to follow to find out that the error was
there all along. Extra bonus points make sure that your program cannot
possibly compile with any of the compiler error checking diagnostics
enabled. Sure, the compiler may be able to do subscripts bounds checking,
but real programmers don't use this feature, and neither should you. Why
let the compiler check for errors when you can use your own lucrative and
rewarding time to find these subtle bugs?
Combine Bug Fixes With Upgrades

Never put out a "bug fix only" release. Be sure to combine bug fixes with
database format changes, complex user interface changes, and complete
rewrites of the administration interfaces. That way, it will be so hard to
upgrade that people will get used to the bugs and start calling them
features. And the people that really want these "features" to work
differently will have an incentive to upgrade to the new versions. This
will save you maintenance work in the long run, and get you more revenue
from your customers.
Change File Formats With Each Release Of Your Product

Yeah, your customers will demand upwards compatibility, so go ahead and do
that. But make sure that there is no backwards compatibility. That will
prevent customers from backing out the newer release, and coupled with a
sensible bug fix policy (see above), will guarantee that once on a newer
release, they will stay there. Extra bonus points Figure out how to get the
old version to not even recognise files created by the newer versions. That
way, they not only can't read them, they will deny that they are even
created by the same application! Hint PC word processors provide a useful
example of this sophisticated behaviour.
Compensate For Bugs

Don't worry about finding the root cause of bugs in the code. Simply put in
compensating code in the higher-level routines. This is a great
intellectual exercise, akin to 3D chess, and will keep future code
maintainers entertained for hours as they try to figure out whether the
problem is in the low-level routines that generate the data or in the
high-level routines that change various cases all around. This technique is
great for compilers, which are inherently multi-pass programs. You can
completely avoid fixing problems in the early passes by simply making the
later passes more complicated. With luck, you will never have to speak to
the little snot who supposedly maintains the front-end of the compiler.
Extra bonus points make sure the back-end breaks if the front-end ever
generates the correct data.
Use Spin Locks

Avoid actual synchronization primitives in favor of a variety of spin locks
-- repeatedly sleep then test a (non-volatile) global variable until it
meets your criterion. Spin locks are much easier to use and more "general"
and "flexible " than the system objects.
Sprinkle sync code liberally

Sprinkle some system synchronization primitives in places where they are
not needed. I came across one critical section in a section of code where
there was no possibility of a second thread. I challenged the original
developer and he indicated that it helped document that the code was, well,
"critical!"
Graceful Degradation

If your system includes an NT device driver, require the application to
malloc I/O buffers and lock them in memory for the duration of any
transactions, and free/unlock them after. This will result in an
application that crashes NT if prematurely terminated with that buffer
locked. But nobody at the client site likely will be able to change the
device driver, so they won't have a choice.
Custom Script Language

Incorporate a scripting command language into your client/server apps that
is byte compiled at runtime.
Compiler Dependent Code

If you discover a bug in your compiler or interpreter, be sure to make that
behaviour essential for your code to work properly. After all you don't use
another compiler, and neither should anyone else!
A Real Life Example

Here's a real life example written by a master. Let's look at all the
different techniques he packed into this single C function.
void* Realocate(void*buf, int os, int ns)
{
void*temp;
temp = malloc(os);
memcpy((void*)temp, (void*)buf, os);
free(buf);
buf = malloc(ns);
memset(buf, 0, ns);
memcpy((void*)buf, (void*)temp, ns);
return buf;
}
Reinvent simple functions which are part of the standard libraries.
The word Realocate is not spelled correctly. Never underestimate the power
of creative spelling.
Make a temporary copy of input buffer for no real reason.
Cast things for no reason. memcpy() takes (void*), so cast our pointers
even though they're already (void*). Bonus for the fact that you could pass
anything anyway.
Never bothered to free temp. This will cause a slow memory leak, that may
not show up until the program has been running for days.
Copy more than necessary from the buffer just in case. This will only cause
a core dump on Unix, not Windows.
It should be obvious that os and ns stand for "old size" and "new size".
After allocating buf, memset it to 0. Don't use calloc() because somebody
might rewrite the ANSI spec so that calloc() fills the buffer with
something other than 0. (Never mind the fact that we're about to copy
exactly the same amount of data into buf.)
How To Fix Unused Variable Errors

If your compiler issues "unused local variable" warnings, don't get rid of
the variable. Instead, just find a clever way to use it. My favorite is...
i = i;
It's The Size That Counts

It almost goes without saying that the larger a function is, the better it
is. And the more jumps and GOTOs the better. That way, any change must be
analysed through many scenarios. It snarls the maintenance programmer in
the spaghettiness of it all. And if the function is truly gargantuan, it
becomes the Godzilla of the maintenance programmers, stomping them
mercilessly to the ground before they have an idea of what's happened.
A Picture is a 1000 Words; A Function is 1000 Lines

Make the body of every method as long as possible - hopefully you never
write any methods or functions with fewer than a thousand lines of code,
deeply nested, of course.
One Missing File

Make sure that one or more critical files is missing. This is best done
with includes of includes. For example, in your main module, you have
#include <stdcode.h>
Stdcode.h is available. But in stdcode.h, there's a reference to
#include "a:\\refcode.h"
and refcode.h is no where to be found.
Write Everywhere, Read Nowhere

At least one variable should be set everywhere and used almost nowhere.
Unfortunately, modern compilers usually stop you from doing the reverse,
read everywhere, write nowhere, but you can still do it in C or C++.
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, Bali, 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 (source code) 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 life easier for
the maintenance programmer.

I discuss this further in the SCID student project.

An early version of this article appeared in Java Developers' Journal
(volume 2 issue 6). I also spoke on this topic in 1997 November at the
Colorado Summit Conference. It has been gradually growing ever since.

This essay is a joke! I apologise if anyone took this literally. Canadians
think it gauche to label jokes with a :-). People paid no attention when I
harped about how to write __maintainable code. I found people were more
receptive hearing all the goofy things people often do to muck it up.
Checking for unmaintainable design patterns is a rapid way to defend
against malicious or inadvertent sloppiness.
-------------- parte successiva --------------
Un allegato HTML è stato rimosso...
URL: <http://lists.fsugpadova.org/pipermail/fsug-corso-python3/attachments/20160607/d2d3f7bd/attachment.html>