This joke is about a QA engineer (Quality Assurance engineer) testing software systems. The humor comes from how QA engineers systematically test for edge cases and unexpected inputs to ensure a system (in this case, the โbarโ) works correctly.
Hereโs the breakdown:
โข โOrders a beerโ = Normal use case.
โข โOrders 0 beersโ = Testing zero input.
โข โOrders 99999999999 beersโ = Testing very large input.
โข โOrders a lizardโ = Testing invalid input.
โข โOrders -1 beersโ = Testing negative input.
โข โOrders a ueicbksjdhdโ = Testing nonsensical input or gibberish.
The punchline: โThe bar bursts into flames, killing everyoneโ humorously suggests that the software (the bar) couldnโt handle a real user interacting with it, despite all the QA tests. This exaggerates a common issue in software development: even rigorous testing can miss real-world scenarios that break the system.
Kevmeister_B
2 months ago
Coding and programs are very finnicky at times. The QA guy tested for every case in ordering anything and it all worked. Then the customer did something that wasn’t expected and everything exploded.
philyppis
2 months ago
Summarizing: The bar is a computer program. The QA guy is the one who tests it. He tests many things to be sure the program doesn’t crash.
But, here comes the actual users, they do something unexpected, and manage to crash the software.
MelancholyMorose
2 months ago
Hi, real QA here. ๐
It’s a valid joke that something that’s obvious to an end user shouldn’t be missed by QA but sometimes does. You see this complaint a lot in video games. “Was this even tested?!”
The reason it misses the mark (and isn’t very funny to us QA peeps) though is because of two things.
#1 – QA isn’t always just testing against the customer. Our job is also to protect system from malicious users. So while a “real” user wouldn’t input negative numbers and gibberish, a user with bad intentions certainly would. (See sql injection for example.) We’re trying to protect the servers from crashing and your data from being stolen. Not just all the typical user workflows.
#2 – QA often does find those bugs, but they get deprioritized by management to meet deadlines or because other issues are a bigger deal. (Or because these ‘major’ issues have easy workarounds, like “look at the sign that has an arrow pointing to the bathroom”.)
GhaimGhaim
2 months ago
Help I can’t this is so funny ๐คฃ๐คฃ๐ญ๐ญ๐ญ๐ญ
lechonko
2 months ago
I had a friend in college that could break anything. We would give her basic instructions for our CS projects and let her play. It was the best QC we could ever ask for!
MilStd
2 months ago
When you are creating a computer program you need to test it for a range of unusual inputs and uses. But the user will almost always find a way to use it in a completely unexpected way (almost immediately) that crashes it completely.
This is such a common experience that this joke references that happenstance and programmers will laugh because they recognise the pattern of events.
shyguy157
2 months ago
the joke is the same as the last dozen times this was posted.
Particular-Hair4905
2 months ago
Some of y’all shouldn’t reproduce
curiousjosh
2 months ago
Hahaha. Iykyk
Usual-Scarcity-4910
2 months ago
Well asking for bathroom was completely foreseeable.
Tricky_Big_8774
2 months ago
u/repostsleuthbot
old___school
2 months ago
Testing
Disastrous-Hearing72
2 months ago
*As a software engineer – LMAO!
Mission_Grapefruit92
2 months ago
When thereโs a lizard in the bar, he only came inside to start a fire in the bathroom
Key-You-9534
2 months ago
Lmao
MoonToast101
2 months ago
u/repostsleuthbot
niktaeb
2 months ago
Nobody did positive path testing here! Only tested for the neg paths.
awfully_hot_coffepot
2 months ago
Coding people gotta be the least funniest mfs on the planet
echicdesign
2 months ago
My husband has the opposite effect, he walks into the room and tech starts working. Whereas I carry enough static charge to fry most things I touch unless I consciously earth first.
This joke is about a QA engineer (Quality Assurance engineer) testing software systems. The humor comes from how QA engineers systematically test for edge cases and unexpected inputs to ensure a system (in this case, the โbarโ) works correctly.
Hereโs the breakdown:
โข โOrders a beerโ = Normal use case.
โข โOrders 0 beersโ = Testing zero input.
โข โOrders 99999999999 beersโ = Testing very large input.
โข โOrders a lizardโ = Testing invalid input.
โข โOrders -1 beersโ = Testing negative input.
โข โOrders a ueicbksjdhdโ = Testing nonsensical input or gibberish.
The punchline: โThe bar bursts into flames, killing everyoneโ humorously suggests that the software (the bar) couldnโt handle a real user interacting with it, despite all the QA tests. This exaggerates a common issue in software development: even rigorous testing can miss real-world scenarios that break the system.
Coding and programs are very finnicky at times. The QA guy tested for every case in ordering anything and it all worked. Then the customer did something that wasn’t expected and everything exploded.
Summarizing: The bar is a computer program. The QA guy is the one who tests it. He tests many things to be sure the program doesn’t crash.
But, here comes the actual users, they do something unexpected, and manage to crash the software.
Hi, real QA here. ๐
It’s a valid joke that something that’s obvious to an end user shouldn’t be missed by QA but sometimes does. You see this complaint a lot in video games. “Was this even tested?!”
The reason it misses the mark (and isn’t very funny to us QA peeps) though is because of two things.
#1 – QA isn’t always just testing against the customer. Our job is also to protect system from malicious users. So while a “real” user wouldn’t input negative numbers and gibberish, a user with bad intentions certainly would. (See sql injection for example.) We’re trying to protect the servers from crashing and your data from being stolen. Not just all the typical user workflows.
#2 – QA often does find those bugs, but they get deprioritized by management to meet deadlines or because other issues are a bigger deal. (Or because these ‘major’ issues have easy workarounds, like “look at the sign that has an arrow pointing to the bathroom”.)
Help I can’t this is so funny ๐คฃ๐คฃ๐ญ๐ญ๐ญ๐ญ
I had a friend in college that could break anything. We would give her basic instructions for our CS projects and let her play. It was the best QC we could ever ask for!
When you are creating a computer program you need to test it for a range of unusual inputs and uses. But the user will almost always find a way to use it in a completely unexpected way (almost immediately) that crashes it completely.
This is such a common experience that this joke references that happenstance and programmers will laugh because they recognise the pattern of events.
the joke is the same as the last dozen times this was posted.
Some of y’all shouldn’t reproduce
Hahaha. Iykyk
Well asking for bathroom was completely foreseeable.
u/repostsleuthbot
Testing
*As a software engineer – LMAO!
When thereโs a lizard in the bar, he only came inside to start a fire in the bathroom
Lmao
u/repostsleuthbot
Nobody did positive path testing here! Only tested for the neg paths.
Coding people gotta be the least funniest mfs on the planet
My husband has the opposite effect, he walks into the room and tech starts working. Whereas I carry enough static charge to fry most things I touch unless I consciously earth first.
This is actually funny
here is a great [animation](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3uPIFItnrcg) of it