>>>I agree.....hard-coding names is a bad idea. Guess what, I've seen source code from commercial applications that do it.
>
>I've seen several examples of code in commercial application source where the code could not possibly have been tested because it would have crashed had it been executed. I only found them because I had the misfortune to create the weird cases that executed the code and caused it to crash.
>That's not crappy coding. That's just human limitation.

And taking a stand that says crappy code should be accepted will never advance the craft.

>
>I tell my clients that I work by trial and error, but it's mostly error.
>If I type 10 lines of code, at least 6 of them will have a mistake in them. One of the reasons I love the VS IDE is that the intellisense finds most of them for me.
>But even if they're corrected, they're still errors and I know that there are plenty of logic errors that intellisense misses.
>As a result I probably spend more time designing test cases than the average programmer.
>Just a couple of weeks ago someone exposed a bug in some of my code that's been executed at least a thousand times daily for the past ten years
>
>Error-free code is an oxymoron and a dangerous myth.