Editing 1926: Bad Code

This comic is the fourth in the [[:Category:Code Quality|Code Quality]] series:

[[Ponytail]] has caught [[Cueball]] in the act of writing some messy code — code in the form of a spreadsheet formula, which in turn produces another program in a language called {{w|Haskell (programming language)|Haskell}}. Haskell is a {{w|purely functional programming}} language, a concept that has a debatably steep learning curve, which causes it to be somewhat obscure, as referenced in [[1312: Haskell]]. It is explained that ''this'' code will, in turn, {{w|Parser|interpret}} ''more'' source code, specifically code written in {{w|HTML}}.  Parsing HTML is notoriously tricky without a dedicated software library for several reasons, including frequent changes to web pages, a nested structure of tags and quotes that frustrates {{w|regular expression}}s, allowing new lines to be started almost anywhere, and different standards that are followed or not followed to varying degrees.

After Cueball excuses his bad code by stating that "nothing depends on this" (meaning that no other projects rely on this code being good to operate properly), Ponytail uses the analogy of breaking a non-load-bearing wall to ridicule Cueball's excuse. A {{w|load-bearing wall}} is a wall that plays a role in supporting the building. Damaging such a wall would threaten the structural integrity of the entire building, and could potentially cause a collapse. In contrast, walls that aren't load-bearing are designed only to separate spaces within the building, and do not contribute to keeping the building up. Damaging or destroying such walls wouldn't endanger the overall structure of the building. However, supporting the building is just ''one'' of the functions which could depend on having an intact wall, and non-load-bearing walls are still there for a purpose. Walls serve many other important purposes, from creating opaque and sound blocking barriers (desirable for privacy purposes, particularly for bedrooms and bathrooms), to containing and protecting water pipes and electrical wiring. Ponytail's analogy suggests that, even though poorly written-code wouldn't cause the entire program to fail, it's still not a good idea.

This is most likely a continuation of the [[:Category:Code Quality|Code Quality]] series, but it differs slightly. For one thing, all of the previous strips were named "Code Quality <number>", with the exception of the first, which was just named "Code Quality". Also note that, unlike the previous Code Quality strips, Ponytail does not start using similes like "This is like being in a house built by a child using nothing but a hatchet and a picture of a house". It's also the longest explanation of Cueball's code by Cueball himself.

The title text suggests that Cueball's approach to breaking the wall - scotch-taping a bunch of hammers together - is as good as his code, and his excuse is similar.

:[Cueball is at his desk on a swivel chair, using his computer. Ponytail walks towards him.]

:Ponytail: That's the ugliest mess of code I've ever seen. What on earth are you working on?

:[Cueball is turns back towards the computer while Ponytail looks over his shoulder at the computer screen.]

:[Ponytail points away from the scene while still looking at the computer screen.]