Do all the things like ++ or -- rants, post your own rants, comment on others' rants and build your customized dev avatarSign Up
From the creators of devRant, Pipeless lets you power real-time personalized recommendations and activity feeds using a simple APILearn More
Search - "debugger"
So I just found out that my colleague who I often have to work with does not use a debugger to troubleshoot any bugs at all. Actually, he does not even run or test his code locally either with prints or something similar. He just commits java code directly on bitbucket, no source control, without making sure it compiles and then he runs a CI provided by devops that takes 4 freaking hours to run because he bloated that shit up somehow.
I suggested politely to help him find a more efficient approach and to use my hardware setups for speeding up his work because I assume it must be pretty painful to work with, but he just refused.
That and those "seniors" with 10 years Linux development XP in the embedded field who don't know basic commands like ls, cat and touch and code in notepad.
Fucking me, who the hell am I working with and can someone please end me?6
Recently applied at a local company. Webform, "enter some details and we'll get back to you"-like.
Entered my details, hit submit, lo and behold "Error 503 - something went wrong on our end".
I was just baffled. It's a well-established IT company and they can't even get their application form to work?
So I'm sitting there in the debugger console, monitoring network stuff to see if anything is weird. I obviously hit submit some several more times during that.
Eventually I give up.
In the night my phone wakes me up with a shitton of "we've received your application and will review it..." emails.
Yeah they didn't get back to me.2
Two big moments today:
1. Holy hell, how did I ever get on without a proper debugger? Was debugging some old code by eye (following along and keeping track mentally, of what the variables should be and what each step did). That didn't work because the code isn't intuitive. Tried the print() method, old reliable as it were. Kinda worked but didn't give me enough fine-grain control.
Bit the bullet and installed Wing IDE for python. And bam, it hit me. How did I ever live without step-through, and breakpoints before now?
2. Remember that non-sieve prime generator I wrote a while back? (well maybe some of you do). The one that generated quasi lucas carmichael (QLC) numbers? Well thats what I managed to debug. I figured out why it wasn't working. Last time I released it, I included two core methods, genprimes() and nextPrime(). The first generates a list of primes accurately, up to some n, and only needs a small handful of QLC numbers filtered out after the fact (because the set of primes generated and the set of QLC numbers overlap. Well I think they call it an embedding, as in QLC is included in the series generated by genprimes, but not the converse, but I digress).
nextPrime() was supposed to take any arbitrary n above zero, and accurately return the nearest prime number above the argument. But for some reason when it started, it would return 2,3,5,6...but genprimes() would work fine for some reason.
So genprimes loops over an index, i, and tests it for primality. It begins by entering the loop, and doing "result = gffi(i)".
This calls into something a function that runs four tests on the argument passed to it. I won't go into detail here about what those are because I don't even remember how I came up with them (I'll make a separate post when the code is fully fixed).
If the number fails any of these tests then gffi would just return the value of i that was passed to it, unaltered. Otherwise, if it did pass all of them, it would return i+1.
And once back in genPrimes() we would check if the variable 'result' was greater than the loop index. And if it was, then it was either prime (comparatively plentiful) or a QLC number (comparatively rare)--these two types and no others.
nextPrime() was only taking n, and didn't have this index to compare to, so the prior steps in genprimes were acting as a filter that nextPrime() didn't have, while internally gffi() was returning not only primes, and QLCs, but also plenty of composite numbers.
Now *why* that last step in genPrimes() was filtering out all the composites, idk.
But now that I understand whats going on I can fix it and hypothetically it should be possible to enter a positive n of any size, and without additional primality checks (such as is done with sieves, where you have to check off multiples of n), get the nearest prime numbers. Of course I'm not familiar enough with prime number generation to know if thats an achievement or worthwhile mentioning, so if anyone *is* familiar, and how something like that holds up compared to other linear generators (O(n)?), I'd be interested to hear about it.
I also am working on filtering out the intersection of the sets (QLC numbers), which I'm pretty sure I figured out how to incorporate into the prime generator itself.
I also think it may be possible to generator primes even faster, using the carmichael numbers or related set--or even derive a function that maps one set of upper-and-lower bounds around a semiprime, and map those same bounds to carmichael numbers that act as the upper and lower bound numbers on the factors of a semiprime.
Meanwhile I'm also looking into testing the prime generator on a larger set of numbers (to make sure it doesn't fail at large values of n) and so I'm looking for more computing power if anyone has it on hand, or is willing to test it at sufficiently large bit lengths (512, 1024, etc).
Lastly, the earlier work I posted (linked below), I realized could be applied with ECM to greatly reduce the smallest factor of a large number.
If ECM, being one of the best methods available, only handles 50-60 digit numbers, & your factors are 70+ digits, then being able to transform your semiprime product into another product tree thats non-semiprime, with factors that ARE in range of ECM, and which *does* contain either of the original factors, means products that *were not* formally factorable by ECM, *could* be now.
That wouldn't have been possible though withput enormous help from many others such as hitko who took the time to explain the solution was a form of modular exponentiation, Fast-Nop who contributed on other threads, Voxera who did as well, and support from Scor in particular, and many others.
Thank you all. And more to come.
Links mentioned (because DR wouldn't accept them as they were):
> See unintelligible error from stuff that used to work and now it doesn't
> Ask colleagues if they ever met the error
> Fucktard colleague says "try using the debugger, if you run the code line by line you may probably understand what's wrong"
Dear Fucktard, I've been writing code for 7 years now, you can safely assume I know how to use a debugger if need be.
The thing: when I ask "have you ever met this error" I'm asking if you actually know what's going on, BEFORE diving in a 3 hours long debugging session of code written 6 years ago by people who have left the company in the meantime.
You don't always have to say something. Sometimes it happens: you may not have anything clever to add, and a simple "I'm sorry I don't know" is perfectly fine.1
senior: i'm going to read the code changes of the PR that caused this bug, many files , lots of lines of code to see if i can suss out this issue
me: skimmed the PR, i give up, unga bunga time, time to compare the variables in the debugger between the different implementations, found the difference
due credit, the unga bunga approach worked this time, might nto always work3
docker, Dockerfiles - devops tools - amount of shell commands inside them and mangled && to make everything running in one file layer makes those unreadable mess that you need to think twice to understand, there is no debugger for it, you do everything with try and see what happens, there is actually no real dev toolset for devops and that sucks, since you got builder images that makes things more mangled than before, it’s clearly missing some external officially approved scripting language or at least
WITH LAYER and indentation / parentheses syntax and they still trying to make it flat, why are you doing that ?
as a result next to Dockerfile cause you can’t import multiple ones you get bunch bash scripts with mangled syntax and other crap that is glued together to make a monster - and this runs most of current software on this planet2
console.log("got here 1") is waaayyyy better then installing a debugger and you cannot tell me other wise7
Just ended a 4 hour debugging session trying to work out dlv debugger for golang, only to know that "dlv doesn't work on wsl".
Movies depiction of us was so wrong :'(1
when your coworker wants help on something but they can't seem to explain the problem or you fail to understand them explaining the problem
also not sure if i had to show them how to set a debugger breakpoint in the web browser debugger
postman to manually check api endpoint works
try again later, doing what you think was the exact same shit, which you've documented, reread your document get 404
find out its returning a 404 when the code i added fails, welp4