Code by NormanWisdom ...

Your classes are huge and your methods are bigger; you've said everything again and again and again and you've added another piece of unnecessary code. 

Somewhere far away a toddler in a toy shop approaches a leaning pyramid of Tickle-me-Elmo boxes. He is leaning...teetering...reaching for a toy.
 
Outside a drunk undoes his zip and leans against the wall, waiting for a pedestrian to pass by while a stray dogs rustles through discarded pizza boxes.

Loudly, a fart backfires.. you never once tested.

Your code is in ExtremeNormanForm...partially working today, but sure to be unfixable tomorrow.  ''Uh, are we ''sure'' that code ever ran in the first place? Maybe for a few paths of execution, but...''

Try aiming for the ExtremeNormalForm next time...

----

Sorry, I couldn't resist 
-- DannyAyers

We start with PestDrivenDevelopment

There's also UnfitTesting and DivorcedPairProgramming ... 

* Is that how you come up with a SpiteSolution?
** I generally use RabidPrototyping.
*** Followed by O''''''bsceneProgramming?

''I nearly fell off my chair laughing at this one. -- MichaelFeathers''

I happened to notice this page immediately after
PsychoGraphics. Odd things, coincidences. --GarethMcCaughan

Real world quote regarding ExtremeNormanForm, "That isn't possible.  My code doesn't do that, the tester must have made a mistake."

I've heard that too often to count. Sometimes it's even true. It's pretty much in the same category as blaming bugs on the compiler; compilers do in fact have bugs, but it's not the first suspect.
----
CategoryHumor