Looks like it's generated from something..?

typedef float flaot; // Quicker than learning to tpye accurately.

try {

    //
    // Some Java code that throws a lot of checked exceptions.
    //

} catch (SomeCheckedException e) {
    // I DON'T ALWAYS WRITE EMPTY CATCH BLOCKS
} catch (AnotherCheckedException e) {
    // BUT WHEN I DO, I'M CODING IN JAVA
}

float4 color = u_texture.Load(uv, int2(+0, +0));

This was causing crash bug on intel gpu's on our shipped game. Offsetting by zero isn't that wise thing to do but who would have guessed the implications.

I just had to share this from my r-type clone from 1998.

Procedure DrawFloor(FloorStep:Integer);
begin
_RangeCheck:=True;
{Enable CJEPROC flag for clipping of sprites}
Flr.PlotVirtual(31-FloorStep,16,ScreenPtr);
Flr.PlotVirtual(47-FloorStep,16,ScreenPtr); {Don't even think of accusing}
Flr.PlotVirtual(63-FloorStep,16,ScreenPtr); {me of being a lazy coder,}
Flr.PlotVirtual(79-FloorStep,16,ScreenPtr); {'coz this chunk of calls is}
Flr.PlotVirtual(95-FloorStep,16,ScreenPtr); {about ten times faster than}
Flr.PlotVirtual(111-FloorStep,16,ScreenPtr); {a loop, so there!}
Flr.PlotVirtual(127-FloorStep,16,ScreenPtr);
Flr.PlotVirtual(143-FloorStep,16,ScreenPtr);
Flr.PlotVirtual(159-FloorStep,16,ScreenPtr);
Flr.PlotVirtual(175-FloorStep,16,ScreenPtr);
Flr.PlotVirtual(191-FloorStep,16,ScreenPtr);
Flr.PlotVirtual(207-FloorStep,16,ScreenPtr);
Flr.PlotVirtual(223-FloorStep,16,ScreenPtr);
Flr.PlotVirtual(239-FloorStep,16,ScreenPtr);
Flr.PlotVirtual(255-FloorStep,16,ScreenPtr);
Flr.PlotVirtual(271-FloorStep,16,ScreenPtr);
Flr.PlotVirtual(287-FloorStep,16,ScreenPtr);
Flr.PlotVirtual(303-FloorStep,16,ScreenPtr);
Flr.PlotVirtual(319-FloorStep,16,ScreenPtr);
Flr.PlotVirtual(335-FloorStep,16,ScreenPtr);
Flr.PlotVirtual(351-FloorStep,16,ScreenPtr);
Flr.PlotVirtual(367-FloorStep,16,ScreenPtr);
Flr.PlotVirtual(-1-FloorStep,16,ScreenPtr);
Flr.PlotVirtual(15-FloorStep,16,ScreenPtr);
If (Level=2) or (Level=3) then
begin
Flr2.PlotVirtual(31-FloorStep,184,ScreenPtr);
Flr2.PlotVirtual(47-FloorStep,184,ScreenPtr);
Flr2.PlotVirtual(63-FloorStep,184,ScreenPtr);
Flr2.PlotVirtual(79-FloorStep,184,ScreenPtr);
Flr2.PlotVirtual(95-FloorStep,184,ScreenPtr);
Flr2.PlotVirtual(111-FloorStep,184,ScreenPtr);
Flr2.PlotVirtual(127-FloorStep,184,ScreenPtr);
Flr2.PlotVirtual(143-FloorStep,184,ScreenPtr);
Flr2.PlotVirtual(159-FloorStep,184,ScreenPtr);
Flr2.PlotVirtual(175-FloorStep,184,ScreenPtr);
Flr2.PlotVirtual(191-FloorStep,184,ScreenPtr);
Flr2.PlotVirtual(207-FloorStep,184,ScreenPtr);
Flr2.PlotVirtual(223-FloorStep,184,ScreenPtr);
Flr2.PlotVirtual(239-FloorStep,184,ScreenPtr);
Flr2.PlotVirtual(255-FloorStep,184,ScreenPtr);
Flr2.PlotVirtual(271-FloorStep,184,ScreenPtr);
Flr2.PlotVirtual(287-FloorStep,184,ScreenPtr);
Flr2.PlotVirtual(303-FloorStep,184,ScreenPtr);
Flr2.PlotVirtual(319-FloorStep,184,ScreenPtr);
Flr2.PlotVirtual(335-FloorStep,184,ScreenPtr);
Flr2.PlotVirtual(351-FloorStep,184,ScreenPtr);
Flr2.PlotVirtual(367-FloorStep,184,ScreenPtr);
Flr2.PlotVirtual(-1-FloorStep,184,ScreenPtr);
Flr2.PlotVirtual(15-FloorStep,184,ScreenPtr);
end;
_RangeCheck:=False;
{Disable it again for increse in speed}
end;

The scary thing was, on my 386 at 25mhz it was noticeably faster, even without needing to profile to notice! I feel dirty just re-reading it...

int seven = 9; // this MUST be 6 to work.

Ouch.