retard devs

public String getCode(int i)
{
    return doGetCode(i);
}

I fucking hate java programmers

>a for loop has a dedicated method
rajesh, what are you doing?

>>61819191
This was written by either a diversity hire, or by some higher-ups nephew or son whom "needs some work experience".
Alternatively outsourcing, but that kind of code is below even pajeet tier, so I don't think so.

>>61819191
My favourite part is the forLoop method.

>>61819290
The application published a REST API for the other part that is a Chromium based front end. The server needs 30-60seconds to start up.

The code is really fucked up.

Wait so

>array of hardcoded strings
>get run through a bunch of retarded string manipulation when queried
>absolutely no reason other than to make the retrieval take more time

Am I understanding this right?

>>61820412
Yes :3

>>61819215

public String getModuleToken(String moduleToken) {
    return moduleToken;
}

From a cs graduate meme thread a while ago

>>61819215
I've seen constructions like this in Linux Kernel when I wondered how spinlocks worked.
http://elixir.free-electrons.com/linux/latest/source/include/linux/spinlock.h

spin_lock_irq

is defined as

static __always_inline void spin_lock_irq(spinlock_t *lock)
{
    raw_spin_lock_irq(&lock->rlock);
}

raw_spin_lock_irq

is a macro that is defined as

_raw_spin_lock_irq(lock)

We follow it to http://elixir.free-electrons.com/linux/latest/source/kernel/locking/spinlock.c#L165:

void __lockfunc _raw_spin_lock_irq(raw_spinlock_t *lock)
{
    __raw_spin_lock_irq(lock); // editor note: now it's 2 fucking underscores
}
#endif

And at last http://elixir.free-electrons.com/linux/latest/source/include/linux/spinlock_api_smp.h#L124:

static inline void __raw_spin_lock(raw_spinlock_t *lock)
{
    preempt_disable();
    spin_acquire(&lock->dep_map, 0, 0, _RET_IP_);
    LOCK_CONTENDED(lock, do_raw_spin_trylock, do_raw_spin_lock);
}

I mean, I kind of see why this is so, but it's fucking overboard.

>>61819191
Most people on /g/ writes code like this.

>>61820614
>How many levels of underscores are you on
>I dont know maybe 1 or 2
>You're like a little babby, watch this

static inline void ________________________________________________raw_spin_lock(raw_spinlock_t *lock)

>>61819191
What the fuck lmao why

>>61820614
Undefined behaviour.

>>61821469
kek