在Visual Basic 7及以上版本中，我发现实现了短路逻辑求值以保持与遗留的Visual Basic <=6代码的兼容性，有点WTF:

而且 （MSDN） OrElse （MSDN）

c++(或Java)中没有封装的事实。任何对象都可以违反任何其他对象的封装，破坏它的私有数据，只要它是相同的类型。例如:

#include <iostream>
using namespace std;

class X
{
  public:
    // Construct by passing internal value
    X (int i) : i (i) {}

    // This breaks encapsulation
    void violate (X & other)
    {
        other.i += i;
    }

    int get () { return i; }

  private:
    int i;
};

int main (int ac, char * av[])
{
    X a(1), b(2), c(3);

    a.violate (c);
    b.violate (c);
    cout << c.get() << endl;    // "6"
}

JavaScript八进制转换“特性”是一个很好的了解:

parseInt('06') // 6
parseInt('07') // 7
parseInt('08') // 0
parseInt('09') // 0
parseInt('10') // 10

详情请点击这里。

在fortran中(当然是77，可能在95中也是如此)，未声明的变量和以I到N开头的参数(“In”组)将是INTEGER，所有其他未声明的变量和参数将是REAL(源)。这与“在某些情况下可选的空白”相结合，导致了最著名的错误之一。

正如弗雷德·韦伯在1990年的《另类民间传说:计算机》一书中所说:

I worked at Nasa during the summer of 1963. The group I was working in was doing preliminary work on the Mission Control Center computer systems and programs. My office mate had the job of testing out an orbit computation program which had been used during the Mercury flights. Running some test data with known answers through it, he was getting answers that were close, but not accurate enough. So, he started looking for numerical problems in the algorithm, checking to make sure his tests data was really correct, etc. After a couple of weeks with no results, he came across a DO statement, in the form: DO 10 I=1.10 This statement was interpreted by the compiler (correctly) as: DO10I = 1.10 The programmer had clearly intended: DO 10 I = 1, 10 After changing the . to a , the program results were correct to the desired accuracy. Apparently, the program's answers had been "good enough" for the sub-orbital Mercury flights, so no one suspected a bug until they tried to get greater accuracy, in anticipation of later orbital and moon flights. As far as I know, this particular bug was never blamed for any actual failure of a space flight, but the other details here seem close enough that I'm sure this incident is the source of the DO story.

我认为这是一个很大的WTF，如果DO10I被作为DO10I，并且反过来，因为隐式声明被认为是类型REAL。这是个很棒的故事。

在Python中:

>>> x = 4
>>> y = 1000000
>>> x is 4
True
>>> y is 1000000
False
>>>

如果你不相信，就试试吧!

COMEFROM是我见过的最奇怪，也可能是最没用的语言功能。

其次是三元运算符，因为它违反了优化的第一条规则。它带来的危害大于它解决的问题。它的危害更大，因为它使代码可读性更差。

并不是一个真正的语言功能，但有趣/很棒的功能使用是Duff的设备。