Not all hacks are bad. But, if I see "// this is a hack to..." or "# this is a hack to..." or similar in code, that is a signal to me that the developer (1) either didn't have time to perform the right thing but could have with more time (within their lifetime), or (2) could not feasibly perform the right thing under constraints given (within their lifetime).
Over the past ~8 years, "hack"'s use has switched back to a much more positive sense- possibly because of HN, or possibly because people read Eric Raymond http://www.catb.org/esr/faqs/hacker-howto.html, but "hack" != "hacker". The negative sense is still used and understood by most developers, and it comes from two things: "HACK... HACK... HACK...", like the sound of an ax attempting to chop down a tree (brute force), and the other definition of a hack not used as much these days, which is "work for hire especially with mediocre professional standards".
I think we should at least consider PPYP to be a subclass of "hack", or perhaps just use the word "hack" instead of PPYP.
> I like the naming and feeling of "Pre-Pooping Your Pants" pattern. We are doing the intentional leak only to be (hopefully) collected later, which may not happen but it still remains memory-safe even in that case. Still this is not very desirable and the name clearly indicates so.