Code Is Crap
UnknownMarch 20, 2012 at 11:11:00 PM PDTWe are using Crap4J for years now within our JAVA projects and it's the only tool which identifies "dangerous" code.
- ▪UnknownMarch 20, 2012 at 11:11:00 PM PDTWe are using Crap4J for years now within our JAVA projects and it's the only tool which identifies "dangerous" code.
Hacker News (Front Page) files mainly under programming. We currently carry 1,723 of its stories. Top-voted stories on Hacker News.
Story provenance
Source · retrieval · rights · ranking — open for full record
inspect →
Story provenance
Attribution is not the same as permission. This drawer separates discovery metadata, excerpts, WeSearch-generated summaries, reuse status, and whether the publisher receives the visit. Nothing here claims a legal grant the publisher has not made.
Record
| Original publisher | Google Testing Blog |
| Canonical URL | https://testing.googleblog.com/2011/02/this-code-is-crap.html |
| Publication time | Wed, 16 Sep 2026 16:13:55 +0000 |
| Retrieval time | 2026-09-16T16:23:41.639Z |
| Last seen | 2026-09-16T16:23:41.639Z |
| Headline source | Publisher (no WeSearch rewrite) |
| Excerpt source | publisher body |
| Excerpt method | First ~120 words (~800 chars) of extracted publisher body, fair-use limited. |
| Summary | WeSearch · cerebras-chat (WeSearch summarizer) |
| Summary source text | contentText |
| Citation coverage | Summary is a WeSearch-generated derivative; primary citation is the original publisher URL. |
| Cluster | None |
| Cluster logic | Not yet clustered, or no peer story found in the clustering window. |
| Ranking reason | Story pages are not engagement-ranked. Hub feeds use recency, with optional source-diversified chronological ordering (cap consecutive stories per source). No personalized ranking. |
| Publisher visit | Yes — open original |
| Substitutes article? | No — link-out required for full text |
Rights status (four layers)
WeSearch handling by dimension
| Indexing | May the item be indexed (stored, ranked, made findable)? | Allowed |
| Snippet | May a short excerpt of the publisher's text be shown? | Allowed |
| AI summary | May WeSearch generate its own short summary of the article? | Limited |
| Retrieval / RAG | May the content be exposed for third-party retrieval-augmented generation? | Not asserted |
| Model training | May the content be used to train AI models? | Not asserted |
| Commercial reuse | May the content be reused commercially? | Not permitted |
Basis: Derived from the published RSS/Atom feed. Contact: [email protected]. Reviewed: 2026-07-24.
Opening excerpt (first ~120 words) tap to expand
UnknownMarch 20, 2012 at 11:11:00 PM PDTWe are using Crap4J for years now within our JAVA projects and it's the only tool which identifies "dangerous" code. Even the Jenkins/Hudson integration is nice!All code coverage tools will deliver lot's of false positives.I don't have to test a method like:public Value getValue(){ return value;}That's common sense, but a tool like CodePro or JaCoCo forces me to write dumb tests.Only Crap4J rocks that way, even it has not been modified since a couple of years.Now it's time to do something, because JAVA7 code is not running with Crap4J!ReplyDelete
Excerpt limited to ~120 words for fair-use compliance. The full article is at Google Testing Blog.
Discussion
0 commentsMore from Google Testing Blog
