X

Aggregator

House Votes For Permanent Daylight Saving Time

Slashdot
1 month 2 weeks ago
The House voted 308-117 to pass the Sunshine Protection Act, which would make daylight saving time permanent nationwide and end the twice-yearly clock change. The bill faces an uncertain future in the Senate, "where one G.O.P. leader said it was unclear whether it could move ahead and at least one Republican appears inclined to try to block it," reports The New York Times. Some sleep experts oppose permanent daylight saving time, arguing that year-round standard time better aligns with circadian rhythms and winter morning safety. The New York Times reports: President Trump has championed the effort to save an extra hour of daylight before nightfall and make the time zone permanent, describing the ritual of moving clocks forward in the spring and back in the fall a "ridiculous, twice yearly production." "We are going with the far more popular alternative, Saving Daylight, which gives you a longer, brighter Day," Mr. Trump wrote in a social media post in May. "And who can be against that." A sizable bloc of Florida Republicans in Congress is leading the charge on legislation that would do just that, mandating daylight saving time nationwide for the entire year. Representative Vern Buchanan of the Tampa Bay area is backing the bill, and Representative Anna Paulina Luna, another Tampa Bay-area Republican, cosponsored it. House leaders agreed to allow a vote on the measure this week as a sweetener for Ms. Luna in their efforts to persuade her to lift a legislative blockade she had maintained as she sought to force Senate action on a voting restriction bill Mr. Trump has championed.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

BeauHD

CodeSOD: The Error Check

The Daily WTF
1 month 2 weeks ago

Today's submission is less a WTF and more a, "Yeah, that'd annoy me too."

Stevie works in a code-base that's largely C, which means function return values are usually used to communicate to status codes. The standard:

BOOL success = someFunc(); if (!success) {// handle the error

If someFunc returns TRUE, we succeeded, otherwise we failed.

There's nothing wrong with that convention. But there is something wrong with one of the long-time developers on the project, because they have their own idiom for doing this. And they've been around long enough that their approach is the convention other developers follow. It's not wrong, per se, just confusing:

BOOL error = someFunc(); if (error == FALSE) { //handle the error errorCode = GetLastError(); //… }

Yes, pretty much anywhere an error can happen, they check if error == FALSE, and if that's true, they have an error.

I'd say, "at least they're consistent", but they're not. It's the convention, sure, but nobody wrote this down as the convention. New developers come in all the time, and they start out writing code in a more "normal" pattern. But the existing code has its pattern, and there is a lot of it. It has a mass and an inertia that is stronger than any developer. They don't change the code, the code changes them.

[Advertisement] BuildMaster allows you to create a self-service release management platform that allows different teams to manage their applications. Explore how!
Remy Porter