Neil_P2PBlog
P2P Blogger
Use @p2pblog to tag me :-)
Posts: 355 
Likes: 209
|
Post by Neil_P2PBlog on Sept 3, 2016 19:52:29 GMT
Some of the code on RS looks sloppy and this surprised me. For example at the statistics page: view-source:https://www.ratesetter.com/aboutus/statistics (copy and paste this as hyperlink not working) 1. The two rate feeds, both 10 day and all time, point to the same all time csv (line 664, 652) 2. The headline market figures table has two measures just commented out (lines 753-758 and 772-775) rather than removed 3. Line 1086-1088, instead of just deleting the code for the "2015 Fintech innovation awards winner" badge after they removed the image they've just left it there as superfluous code. A second example, the provision fund page: view-source:https://www.ratesetter.com/invest/everyday-account/protection (copy and paste this as hyperlink not working) 1. When talking about the size of the provision fund on line 497, they give the headline size of provision fund but also a comment hides a message "£500,000 is a loan from RateSetter" 2. Line 627-631: More superfluous code, just repeated information from a couple of paragraphs above but instead of deleting it here they've just left it there as a code comment. Why I posted this: does anyone else think this is strange to publish code like this for a IT focused business like RS? Why would they have a comment about 500k of the provision fund being a loan from RS? |
|
agent69
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,604
Likes: 4,185
|
Post by agent69 on Sept 4, 2016 16:47:11 GMT
What is the point of posting this information here (other than trying to impress other forum members with how clever you think you are?).
If you have a serious issue it is probably best if you send the details directly to RS.
|
|
Neil_P2PBlog
P2P Blogger
Use @p2pblog to tag me :-)
Posts: 355
Likes: 209
|
Post by Neil_P2PBlog on Sept 4, 2016 17:54:47 GMT
What is the point of posting this information here (other than trying to impress other forum members with how clever you think you are?). If you have a serious issue it is probably best if you send the details directly to RS. Point taken, have updated it to sound less cocky. I posted as it interested me and wondered what others thought! Issue was not a security threat so no need to go direct to RS.
|
|
|
|
Post by davee39 on Sept 4, 2016 20:13:32 GMT
Commented code is completely irrelevant since it not active. As far as I can tell the site works perfectly well. Perhaps you should divert your attention to Funding Circle, they could use some forensic programming talent.
|
|
|
|
Post by westonkevRS on Sept 5, 2016 17:54:23 GMT
I found this post very useful, it allowed me to laugh at with my friends in IT based on no personal insight whatsoever....
Kevin.
|
|
|
|
Post by Financial Thing on Sept 7, 2016 17:58:19 GMT
Some of the code on RS looks sloppy and this surprised me. For example at the statistics page: view-source:https://www.ratesetter.com/aboutus/statistics (copy and paste this as hyperlink not working) 1. The two rate feeds, both 10 day and all time, point to the same all time csv (line 664, 652) 2. The headline market figures table has two measures just commented out (lines 753-758 and 772-775) rather than removed 3. Line 1086-1088, instead of just deleting the code for the "2015 Fintech innovation awards winner" badge after they removed the image they've just left it there as superfluous code. A second example, the provision fund page: view-source:https://www.ratesetter.com/invest/everyday-account/protection (copy and paste this as hyperlink not working) 1. When talking about the size of the provision fund on line 497, they give the headline size of provision fund but also a comment hides a message "£500,000 is a loan from RateSetter" 2. Line 627-631: More superfluous code, just repeated information from a couple of paragraphs above but instead of deleting it here they've just left it there as a code comment. Why I posted this: does anyone else think this is strange to publish code like this for a IT focused business like RS? Why would they have a comment about 500k of the provision fund being a loan from RS? Wish there was a thumbs down button. Sorry but it's a bit of a strange thing to post. Why are you looking at RS's source code?
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 7, 2016 18:04:28 GMT
Why are you looking at RS's source code? I can think of good financial reasons why an investor/lender might be interested in a platforms source code Can't think of any good reasons why they might post about it though. Especially not about something as irrelevant as commented out sections.
|
|
Neil_P2PBlog
P2P Blogger
Use @p2pblog to tag me :-)
Posts: 355
Likes: 209
|
Post by Neil_P2PBlog on Sept 7, 2016 18:31:25 GMT
I can think of good reasons why an investor might be interested in RSs source code Can't think of any good reasons why they might post about it though I often do it to try to get an understanding of how things work and to try to learn from it. For me it's really interesting but perhaps was more suited to a web development forum considering the response. It is just the code they make public, other P2P sites would probably expect this to be looked through - e.g. octopuschoice.com.
|
|
adrianc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 8,987
Likes: 4,813
|
Post by adrianc on Sept 7, 2016 18:35:47 GMT
Why are you looking at RS's source code? He isn't. He's looking at the page source. They're different. The "source code", the actual stuff that the developers work directly on, is run on RS's servers, and produces the page source, which is then transmitted to your browser over t'internet. If RS's servers were giving access to the actual code, then there would be far bigger problems than some untidy HTML.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 7, 2016 18:37:32 GMT
Indeed, a web development or techie forum would probably get a better response for the issues you raised.
As I said, I do believe there are valid financial reasons that could cause a lender to be interested in a platforms source code, and give themselves a competitive advantage if they so desired.
However, most platforms frown on it...
|
|
Investboy
Member of DD Central
Trying to recover from P2P revolution
Posts: 564
Likes: 201
|
Post by Investboy on Sept 8, 2016 14:29:09 GMT
Firstly this is not a RS source code - what you see is the HTML output of the source + database ect.
Secondly whoever complains about comments in the code probably never wrote a piece of software. There is always some random stuff that gets through to production.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 8, 2016 14:47:39 GMT
'Source code' just refers to human-readable code. The fact that it is generated by another program does not exclude it from being source code.
For example, on the RateSetter front page, there are human-readable scripting functions visible. Looks like source code to me.
|
|
adrianc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 8,987
Likes: 4,813
|
Post by adrianc on Sept 8, 2016 17:11:18 GMT
The fact that it is generated by another program does not exclude it from being source code. There's a clue in the word "source". In compiled software, it's what goes into the compiler. In interpreted software, such as the scripting languages that are used in dynamic web page generation, it's what refers to the server-side code that generates the client-side page. Yes, that client-side page also has its page source - that's what is then used by the browser to render the output which the user sees. So "ratesetter's source" is not the page source - that's the browser's source, the result of ratesetter's source being interpreted. That'll be the code for client-side scripting - code that's actually executed IN your browser. If that code wasn't transmitted as code, it simply wouldn't work.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 8, 2016 17:17:09 GMT
Haha, so you admit there is 'code' in what you refer to as the 'source', yet you seriously object to it being referred to as 'source code'? Or 'RateSetters source code', ie source code that belongs to or is generated by RateSetter? That is some serious hair-splitting pedantry right there  |
|
adrianc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 8,987
Likes: 4,813
|
Post by adrianc on Sept 8, 2016 17:26:50 GMT
Haha, so you admit there is 'code' in what you refer to as the 'source', yet you seriously object to it being referred to as 'source code'? Or 'RateSetters source code', ie source code that belongs to or is generated by RateSetter? That is some serious hair-splitting pedantry right there No, it isn't. They're the "source" for different things. Your web browser can't display the page without the page source. But the actual Ratesetter source code? That's something VERY different, and there would be MAJOR repercussions if it leaked. Trying to make out that what's been seen is the RS source code is either a good clue of lack of knowledge of what's being talked about, or a good clue of misleading intent in talking about it. Could the page source be neater? Perhaps. Could that less-than-neat page source indicate that the source code is less neat than it could be? Perhaps. Does that give any kind of indication of anything nefarious or incompetent? No.
|
|
