Am not sure I disagree but I don’t agree completely. It’s insane to merge things that go to production without testing. However at the same time I don’t like continuous integration one bit. Open source mantra is great in my opinion. Release early, release often. If code chews some important data, have a test version of it that needs to run some time before it gets pushed to production.
Delaying merge of someone’s code means branches get further and further apart. At the same time code in main branch gets fixed and tested the most. I would merge often but only full features. None of the half-done stuff. Let humans test it a bit before it reaches target audience. That is usually good enough to catch most bugs. Those that do happen to leak into production are easily fixed since you have fast development cycle and deployment pipeline. And backup frequently.
Prescriptivism is mostly just an unprincipled mishmash of shibboleths someone pulled out of their rear end hundreds of years ago, classism, and knee-jerk reactions against language change.
For example - why do people distinguish less vs fewer to refer to countable vs uncountable nouns? Because someone wrote in 1770 that they thought that distinction was elegant, despite not actually reflecting the way English at the time was spoken.
Why is ain’t “not a word”? Because it originated in the speech of poor people, and was used less commonly by rich people. People roll their eyes at new business-speak because it comes from rich, powerful people, but look down their nose at language innovations from poor hillbillies and other disfavored groups.
And you can find writings from old prescriptivists complaining about literally every change in the language, such as hating the new ambigious use of singular ‘you’ when ‘thou’ was perfectly good and unambiguous or hating phrases like ‘very pleased’.
Today we have chatbots. Yesterday we had search engines and stack overflow. Before that we had books. And before that? Well what do you know… software programming is a relatively novel field. It’s almost as if nobody has perfected how it should be learned.
The most valuable knowledge comes from experience. I copied plenty of code around during my learning days as well, and I still do it today. The most important part however is trying to understand the code you’re working with. If you can understand it, know when it fails, test it in the right way, etc., then sure, you could probably learn to code from chatbots. They provide the information, and you’re at liberty to do what you want with it. If you just copy it and forget, you’ll be a bad programmer. But it’s not like you couldn’t do that before either with the other sources that were available - there were plenty of bad programmers before we had these tools available too.
That said, there is a risk that these chatbots do not provide any useful context around the code that they produce. When you learned from a book or stack overflow, you were reading from a reasonably authoritative source that could explain the code that was produced. But the authority behind the code from chatbots is probably much weaker than what we have from stack overflow, which in turn was probably also weaker than what we have from books. Does it have an effect or learning? I have no clue. But I still think you can learn from chatbots if you use the output that they provide in the right way. (Disclaimer: I have never used one of them and have no experience with them.)
So… too many cooks creating overly complicated meals that occasionally are admirably but more often then not are not worth the money. Also really hard to get into and make more efficient.
Bloated complex frontend with so gosh darn many tools, some specifically created for one certain meals but sometimes get used for other meals, more or less effective. Sometimes it’s already at the table, sometimes gets delivered with your meal.
Fancy looking APIs but you somehow have to know how to correctly talk to them and if you phrase something wrong, well good luck.
VS:
Simple, efficient, maybe not as sophisticated but if you get too many customers: just order a second one.
I’m sure that still works with aliases. Then you’ll have dl/source and Doenloads/source that are the same location. Using aliases will mean any script or program you may use that might point to them won’t just create a new default folder that is then no longer the same location as the renamed one that you’ll expect everything in
You have to try it but I think it still works. Aliases just replaced the text you typed with text in the alias, so if you append a subfolder to the alias it should also be appended to the command.
It’s like using !! when navigating folders. You can do cd ~/Downloads and then !!/source and it resolves to cd ~/Downloads/source
There are also a lot of recurring problems, obscure bugs, performance enhancements that someone has already solved. Software development should care about completing a task, not inventing the wheel (or an image upload) the millionth time.
programmer_humor
Top
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.