|
Vulture Culture posted:Escape rooms are murder mystery dinner theatre for millennials Murder mystery stuff requires people to act which most people are terrible at. Escape rooms you can act like yourself. I wouldn't want to do either with my coworkers.
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2017 13:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 16:50 |
|
|
If my PR gets dinged for not having properties and params listed in alphabetical order one more time I'm gonna scream. It's not even hard to do, just bizarrely annoying.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2017 14:47
|
|
|
Pollyanna posted:If my PR gets dinged for not having properties and params listed in alphabetical order one more time I'm gonna scream. It's not even hard to do, just bizarrely annoying. Params in abc order? Like function params? ARGGHHHH NOOOOO
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2017 15:10
|
|
|
Gounads posted:Params in abc order? Like function params? ARGGHHHH NOOOOO Yep.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2017 15:12
|
|
|
That's dumb as hell. You should order your function params alphabetically in the signature in protest.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2017 15:17
|
|
|
Pollyanna posted:having properties and params listed in alphabetical order Is grounds for murder. Bludgen your reviewer with their insufferable Emacs stuff.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2017 15:21
|
|
|
Pollyanna posted:If my PR gets dinged for not having properties and params listed in alphabetical order one more time I'm gonna scream. It's not even hard to do, just bizarrely annoying. Get out a thesaurus and rename the Params to be alphabetical in their current format.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2017 15:25
|
|
|
Pollyanna posted:If my PR gets dinged for not having properties and params listed in alphabetical order one more time I'm gonna scream. It's not even hard to do, just bizarrely annoying. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2017 15:27
|
|
|
Pollyanna posted:If my PR gets dinged for not having properties and params listed in alphabetical order one more time I'm gonna scream. It's not even hard to do, just bizarrely annoying. That's a coding horror right there
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2017 15:28
|
|
|
I'm not a stickler for alphabetization on principle, but if you're jamming something in a random spot of a list that was clearly alphabetized before you got to it, gently caress yourself and fix it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2017 15:30
|
|
|
Vulture Culture posted:I'm not a stickler for alphabetization on principle, but if you're jamming something in a random spot of a list that was clearly alphabetized before you got to it, gently caress yourself and fix it. If you turn a three argument function into a four argument function by adding the argument in the second spot to maintain alphabetical order, then gently caress you very much. If a function has to get a new argument it should be at the end. But ideally you'd never do that at all.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2017 15:38
|
|
|
Enlighten me, why would it matter or why not? I mean, why is the order important?
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2017 16:46
|
|
|
Keetron posted:Enlighten me, why would it matter or why not? I mean, why is the order important? If your language supports optional parameters, like JS, if you put your new parameter on the end, it will not break existing code that is calling the function with the first 3 parameters. If you put it in the middle, obviously, ALL previous calls will need to be updated. If you are using a language without formal types, like JS, you won't get compile errors to tell you where things are now broken.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2017 16:59
|
|
|
It also makes it much more likely that your commit will have to include changes that you otherwise wouldn't have to make which is just chaff thrown at future maintainers trying to figure out what you did any why.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2017 17:08
|
|
|
Keetron posted:Enlighten me, why would it matter or why not? I mean, why is the order important? The order of arguments is an important stylistic choice that can lead to a cleaner, more consistent, API. hug(person) kiss(person, openMouth) gently caress(person, position, condom) Here are 3 functions that all act on a person, so it makes sense that the person is in the same position. hug(bob) kiss(bob, true) gently caress(bob, reverse_cowgirl, true) in abc order that gets mangled: hug(bob) kiss(true, bob) gently caress(true, bob, reverse_cowgirl) I'll assume we're not talking a language with function overloading, since that would mind-gently caress consumers of the API even more. gently caress(person) gently caress(condom, person) gently caress(person, position) gently caress(condom, person, position) e: This is why every function should just take a single options hash!
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2017 17:14
|
|
|
And if you rename a parameter you might have to change the signature, and IIRC Pollyanna works in a language without static typing, so 
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2017 17:25
|
|
|
A lot of our PR guidelines stem from bad things that have happened (caution being the grandson of disaster and all that), which has me wondering what happened at their place of work that had the team going, "if only we had required function parameters be in alphabetical order! Then this catastrophe could have been averted!" Surely there's some reason for it that isn't some powerful pedant's pet peeve. Surely...
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2017 17:32
|
|
|
Clanpot Shake posted:A lot of our PR guidelines stem from bad things that have happened (caution being the grandson of disaster and all that), which has me wondering what happened at their place of work that had the team going, "if only we had required function parameters be in alphabetical order! Then this catastrophe could have been averted!" "This function takes 14 parameters and I can't remember the order."
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2017 18:24
|
|
|
Yes, of course. Parameters are not the same as variables. Hence my confusion.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2017 18:24
|
|
|
Even granting a valid catastrophe which alphabetic parameters would have avoided, imagine the cross-repo commits sorting them after the policy was established. They would have excellent odds to break every single topic branch, either from merge conflicts or broken interfaces. I'm in awe. Anyway, the correct and adult response is just to prefix an "a" to the first parameter's name, a "b" to the second, and so on.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2017 18:32
|
|
|
lifg posted:"This function takes 14 parameters and I can't remember the order." Add a helpful mnemonic to the method's docstring.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2017 18:34
|
|
|
As far as I know there's no explicitly reason for it, just stylistic "requirements" (of which we have none written down and which would be better served with linters or something instead). Still have that 6mo checkin thing later. Even though I intend to leave this job, I'm still terrified of negative feedback.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2017 18:37
|
|
|
Alphabetical properties is fine as there often isn't a finer logical grouping to use, and if there is, there might be a good case for breaking it up. Alphabetical parameters is the worst thing I've heard all day.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2017 21:02
|
|
|
lifg posted:"This function takes 14 parameters and I can't remember the order." I've learned to love the builder pattern. A bit of work to setup but it's a huge time saver. Pollyanna posted:If my PR gets dinged for not having properties and params listed in alphabetical order one more time I'm gonna scream. It's not even hard to do, just bizarrely annoying. We got sick of this too so we just built a database that exports properties as part of a build. We lean towards trunk based so there's only one version needed.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2017 21:16
|
|
|
Hughlander posted:If you turn a three argument function into a four argument function by adding the argument in the second spot to maintain alphabetical order, then gently caress you very much. If a function has to get a new argument it should be at the end. But ideally you'd never do that at all.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2017 21:27
|
|
|
geeves posted:I've learned to love the builder pattern. A bit of work to setup but it's a huge time saver. Or, in case of Java, just put a dependency to Lombok in your maven/gradle and then add the @Builder annotation to your class declaration and you're done. I also really like @wither, @EqualsAndHashCode and of course @Value and @Data from Lombok. Never need to spend half the lines of your class on getters and setters again.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2017 22:06
|
|
|
Pollyanna posted:As far as I know there's no explicitly reason for it, just stylistic "requirements" (of which we have none written down and which would be better served with linters or something instead). It's just another kind of bikeshedding, and I would turn any requirement about "alphabetically ordered parameters" into an hour long argument because it means the people demanding it aren't actually thinking about the real purpose of the code, and gently caress that very much.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2017 22:07
|
|
|
TheBlackVegetable posted:It's just another kind of bikeshedding, and I would turn any requirement about "alphabetically ordered parameters" into an hour long argument because it means the people demanding it aren't actually thinking about the real purpose of the code, and gently caress that very much. Only an hour?
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2017 22:08
|
|
|
Skandranon posted:Only an hour? As with every programmer estimate, multiply by at least 4
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2017 22:13
|
|
|
Pollyanna posted:As far as I know there's no explicitly reason for it, just stylistic "requirements" (of which we have none written down and which would be better served with linters or something instead). Make sure to insist your negative feedback is presented to you in alphabetical order.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2017 00:13
|
|
|
Carbon dioxide posted:Or, in case of Java, just put a dependency to Lombok in your maven/gradle and then add the @Builder annotation to your class declaration and you're done.  That's what Lombok does? Holy poo poo. I've heard of it, but haven't really delved into it too much. Definitely going to see about getting this in.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2017 00:47
|
|
|
Well that's a red flag.quote:Hi team, We need to perform end to end testing of the new release. This testing needs to be completed and code needs to be bug free by Monday.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2017 12:03
|
|
|
Hi team, I really hosed up the new release. You all need to work overtime to cover up my massive failings by Monday.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2017 12:12
|
|
|
geeves posted:
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2017 12:32
|
|
|
There's AutoValue if you just need a struct-like class, or one with minimal logic. Edit: smackfu posted:Well that's a red flag. Eject Volmarias fucked around with this message at 14:20 on Jul 7, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2017 13:46
|
|
|
Gildiss posted:Hi team, I really hosed up the new release. You all need to work overtime to cover up my massive failings by Monday. We've had some people ask about providing meals and snacks for this weekend but unfortunately that isn't in the budget and we appreciate you working your hardest to help with this issue! You are a valued employee!
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2017 14:00
|
|
|
Please hold, your call is important to us
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2017 17:06
|
|
|
AskYourself posted:Please hold, your call is important to us An excellent canned response for weekend work requests.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2017 17:18
|
|
|
Aside from the fact that ni code is ever bug free, end to end testing is a really bad thing to rush or to use for bug hunting. All bugs should be found during ST, Interface testing and possibly bi-lateral testing.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2017 18:36
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 16:50 |
|
|
What makes you think that gildiss has a management chain that has even heard half of those words, and doesn't utter phrases like "why can't they just make it right in the first place? What are we paying them for?"
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2017 21:54
|
|