Programming as a career

i'm not arguing against testing in any sense, but projecting your own orthodoxy onto a pairing partner kinda defeats the purpose of pairing imo!

Absolute psycho replies to this one

my favorite reason to write software is money

— Abby Fuller (@abbyfuller) July 10, 2020

Ugh, I’ll take your word for it. She’s right of course.

galaxy brain:

and this should be the only reason. money is the best way to transform ideas to value and benefit all in the end. other reasons like freedom, morale or noble purpose can't last long enough and may lead to the opposite.

— Andrew Zhu (@xhinker) July 11, 2020

Wow

God, fuck programmers

We’re not all bad.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pp4suZ4jNXg

All bad including me

Every line of code is a brick in the edifice of fascism, or something.

The best code is no code at all

Bob Marley

Or Vonnegut

Giving a talk on that exact thesis in a couple weeks

gotta love unit tests with inputs such as

new byte[] { 0x27, 00, 00, 00, (byte) 0xFF, (byte) 0b11_0_1_0_0_1_0 }

(this actually my forte, have been extracting bits from bytes since i had a zx81)

DEAD BEEF BAD FOOD

I've got a great poke for Jet Set Willy.

Lol

Don’t know if it’s a religion thing but why do some people hate to do a git rebase and then do a fast-forward merge.

we banned merge commits on our project because of one guy

Not surprised. Did the graph look like the one shone here in The Problem? https://mtyurt.net/post/git-using-advanced-rebase-features-for-a-clean-repository.html

Can you lock out all merges? We have fast-forward-only some branches but then I recently noticed that some of the more unenlightened just merge that branch into theirs and then they can fast-forward this merged melange back.

I missed out on the TDD conversation but I wanted to mention that my one experience pairing with a TDD disciple involved watching her create a bunch of tests that were logically incorrect, getting them to pass, and missing giant pieces of logic that interconnected subsystems of the module we were working on and actively mocking other pieces of functionality we were supposed to be testing, so technically we wrote passing code according to the tests but, because the tests weren't actually right, the whole thing was super buggy and caused a bunch of later rework.

I know this isn't the fault of TDD per se but it did play into a lot of my preconceived notions against it.

Re: merge commits, I don't see why anyone should care what I do on my feature branch as long as I squash-merge into the main branch.

Yeah we don’t care what you do on feature branches but main (nee master) is ff only enforced via our code review thing (gerrit). What this means in practice is you hit “merge” and gerrit rebased your change into the tip of main then merged by ff. if there’s a conflict you have to resolve it and resubmit the review. We used to let people do that without running the tests but the number of people who committed the string “>>>>>>>>>” was getting out of hand so it has to at least build after a manually resolved merge conflict.

Doowatchyalike, just don't create a twelve-lane merge superhighway and then (DEAD) BEEF when your merges ultimately break down.

https://www.destroyallsoftware.com/blog/2017/the-biggest-and-weirdest-commits-in-linux-kernel-git-history

Thanks.

Also, I misspelled Doowutchyalike.

It's pulled, and it's fine, but there's clearly a balance between "octopus merges are fine" and "Christ, that's not an octopus, that's a Cthulhu merge".

I would just like to take a moment to say javascript sucks and lodash sucks and _.times REALLY sucks

Why does every fucking thing have to be a function, how about you () => juggle(myBalls)

Not only does it all have to be a function but there’s a strong convention that functions be anonymous whenever possible because fuck the reader, right?

Isn’t most of lodash in es whatever these days though?

our linting rules haven't been updated yet to favor the native implementations, why because fuck everything and everyone

imo this is what happens when you let Perl aficionados design everything

Don't worry, Dan, it will be updated just as soon as Perl6 is production.

Why does every fucking thing have to be a function, how about you () => juggle(myBalls)

juggle(this.nuts)

everything being a function is good not bad tbh

fuck state, keep it in a box

counterpoint: nah

Mutable state is a turd on the polished marble floor of my exquisite grand hall hung with crystal chandeliers

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xwm3eW9YyFw

Classic or dud: late night email from colleague cc-ing management saying he can’t figure out something you gave him a few weeks ago and it is crashing and you need to put in more error checking etc. ( because his time and productivity etc)

Well this has been sorted for now.

# get password via terminal without echoing
password = STDIN.noecho(&:gets).chomp

reasonable, right? sentence in english explaining the cryptic command that follows. i don't get the "document WHY not WHAT" review comments i always get.

coming new to this code, debugging it later say, such things let you understand which part does what without having to decode the code. = useful, especially if you're in a mixed ability team.

also, review comments from people you haven't asked for reviews, classic or dud?

Leaning towards dud.

Codesplainers gonna codesplain.

If people would just put in fucking comments saying what they were trying to do and what their expectations were, basically defining the contract they're trying to fulfill, it would be about 8 billion times easier to identify logic mistakes than it currently is.

https://www.hillelwayne.com/post/what-comments/

i have an issue with that

> //f.ex $F1a3

f.ex? for example? what's wrong with 'ie' or 'eg'?

(my whole script only exists because someone checked in an aws kms encrypted key without explaining how it was generated, and 3 years later we needed another - lack of documentation again)