Programmer Humor
Welcome to Programmer Humor!
This is a place where you can post jokes, memes, humor, etc. related to programming!
For sharing awful code theres also Programming Horror.
Rules
- Keep content in english
- No advertisements
- Posts must be related to programming or programmer topics
Meanwhile Haskell:
=
\x -> …
The examples on the meme don't bind any variables. If those are lambdas, the Haskell version is just the ... part.
Related: Every Fn key on a keyboard is a missed opportunity! That's not fun at all!

okay, now i gotta figure out how to start a keyboard rave when i press fn
That's a cool looking keyboard!
def (): is pretty nice
Edit: also as someone doing a bunch of CI work right now, Bash can GTFO (unless the alternative is whatever Windows is doing)
Nushell is pretty nice. It's the good parts of “what Microsoft is doing”, i.e. real structured data in a shell-like language and real error handling.
also better to type with one hand
You QWERTY people...
/jk
Colemak is great though
Not sure I'd call what bash has functions. They're closer to subroutines in Basic than functions in other languages, as in you can't return a value from them (they can only return their exit code, and you can capture their stdout and stderr). But even then, they are full subshells. It's one of the reasons I don't really like Bash, you're forced into globally or at least broadly-scoped variables. Oh, and I have no clue right now how to find where in your pipe you got a non-null exit code.
It's not a big problem for simple scripting, but it makes things cumbersome once you try to do more.
I really like bash when dealing with even somewhat advanced scripting. Like the 300 LOC scraper I have written over the past two days which horribly parses HTML files using grep | sed.
It's genuinely so much more fun to do this with Bash than, say, Python. I have once written a scraper using Beautifulsoup and I have no desire to do so ever again.
Honestly, only Haskell manages to beat Bash in how satisfying it feels when you manage to get something working well.

Anyone tried lisp? Looks something like this. ((()))()())))
Remarkable how if the parenthesis is shifted from lambda() to (lambda), people lose the ability to comprehend things.
In the language Gulf of Mexico,
you can use any letters from the word "function" (as long as they're in order)
union foo () => ()
In the language Gulf of Mexico
HUH?
Some languages start arrays at 0, which can be unintuitive for beginners. Some languages start arrays at 1, which isn't representative of how the code actually works. Gulf of Mexico does the best of both worlds: Arrays start at -1.
Oh, I see they're serious! Time to ditch JavaScript.
Naming
Both variables and constants can be named with any Unicode character or string.
const const letter = 'A'! var const 👍 = True! var var 1️⃣ = 1!This includes numbers, and other language constructs.
const const 5 = 4! print(2 + 2 === 5)! //true
This is a recipe for disaster I kinda wanna try
funciton
Idk why but that's how I type it half the time.
Won't you take me to
funcitooon?
Won't you take me to
funcitoon.
You press c and t using the same finger, and i with another. So since you need to use the same finger twice in a row, also moving it a fair distance in between, your other finger just presses the button a little bit too soon, and that's how you end up with funciton
Kotlin also lets you do fun x() = y()
I have no idea why you'd need that especially since return y() is pretty easy, but... I want it!
(Actually, I guess a super simple way of overloading a method, like fun x() = x(defaultValue) could be neat)
This can also be a side product for code blocks being expressions instead of statements.
In rust for example they are, so it's not rare to see functions like:
fn add_one(x: i32) -> i32 {
x+1
}
This lets you do amazing things like:
let x = if y < 0.0 {
0.0
} else {
y
}
which is the same as
x = y < 0.0 ? 0.0 : y
But is much better for more complex logic. So you can forget about chaining 3-4 ternary operations in a single line.
C++ has []{}.
(You can also add more brackets if you wish to do nothing longer: []<>[[]]()[[]]{}())
Then rust has ||{}
Sadly we can't add more complexity without adding an argument:
|_:&'_[()]|{}
Not exactly aimed at language keywords (although it is aimed at the language designers who decided abbreviations in keywords are acceptable):
I hate abbreviations in source code so fucking much. Reading is more of software engineering than writing. If you cannot be bothered to type a whole word because typing is hard for you, find a different job. Do not force others to engage in mental gymnastics to understand what the fuck a variable or function is supposed to mean.
There was a rather famous piece of software at my last job. Guy writing it wanted job security. A lot of the core variables of the application were named based on the sounds a helicopter made. God damn onomatopoeia variables. Pretty sure that shit is still in use somewhere.
Bash was derived by a team of criminally insane programmers in the bowels of a South American asylum so deep in the jungle no country can rightfully claim it as its own. It is the product of the demented keystrokes of the damned, possessing a singular logic so alien that its developers can hardly be said to be human at all.
And I wouldn't have it any other way.
()=>{}
Javascript straddling the middle as usual.
The equivalent in JavaScript / TypeScript would actually be function () {}, this is the syntax for named functions.
C# is the same as bash though.
What, are we code golfing?
Sure. Use :(){ :|:& };: to score every hole-in-one all at once.
() => {}
While C feels fine without having a keyword for function, I feel like bash would have benefitted from it.
basic: def fn
JS:
() => {}