4 ms·

> Avalaxy, while I know companies use tools to do their thing... I don't, I'm old school. You would do well to learn source control system (which these days ba

> Avalaxy, while I know companies use tools to do their thing... I don't, I'm old school. You would do well to learn source control system (which these days basically means git). Leaving aside the team/collaboration part, once you learn it, it's so incredibly freeing. I cannot understate this enough. You can make changes to the code, and then go back with one operation (discard changes). You can work on an experimental idea (in a branch) for a few days/hours, then switch back to your main code to fix an important bug, go back and finish your experimental branch eventually, and merge everything together -- often with nearly zero effort. If you're supporting multiple release versions at once, you can fix a bug in one and often easily apply it to all other versions. Ever have a situation where something just stops working, but you're not sure when other than in worked four months ago? You can arbitrarily check out any old version and test, and even - in a single operation - undo that change from the current version of code. Can you do all this without source control (or with copies named by date)? Sure, but it's kind of like the difference between fetching water from a well using a hand pump and bucket vs having running water and being able to open a tap. Before you have running water, it's just life, and it's not that big a deal to fetch water, really. Once you have it, you could never imagine having to live life that way.

mattbgates 9y ago
I do know what "source control" is but even when I wasn't working for myself, my boss made me still add this stuff, despite knowing at the end, upon saving, it would ask what changes were made. We used something called "Source Safe" from Microsoft. As for what's in the Notes and deleting it upon live production... that is the old stuff... in case the new stuff stopped working for whatever reason. I guess we all have our own methods of doing things. Fortunately, I've not had major issues, though everything is backed up to it a server upon my completion of work for the day.
- megaman22 9y ago
  Man, you're banging rocks together and working hard, rather than smart. My sympathies for being stuck with a crapfest like sourcesafe.
skinnymuch 9y ago
Your status reasoning seems weak. Archive? Version control will have it in history. Maybe rarely you want it around for active references. Otherwise you likely don't need it. The author bit is solved with version control. Much better than a line that can get bogged down with multiple authors or be outdated. It doesn't feel like you're being old fashioned or old school. It seems like you're being a bit stubborn in your ways. Version control is a good thing. Perhaps there's better ways. Going your way with not having an sort of real alternative isn't right though. Your other reasons like coming back years later can be applied to version control too. It's helpful to have commits that have diffs, time stamps, author, and other meta data. Imagine having to come back 3 years later without any of that. Commit history might help you remember and manage your project more quickly, efficiently, and effectively.

mattbgates 9y ago

I do know what "source control" is but even when I wasn't working for myself, my boss made me still add this stuff, despite knowing at the end, upon saving, it would ask what changes were made. We used something called "Source Safe" from Microsoft. As for what's in the Notes and deleting it upon live production... that is the old stuff... in case the new stuff stopped working for whatever reason. I guess we all have our own methods of doing things. Fortunately, I've not had major issues, though everything is backed up to it a server upon my completion of work for the day.

megaman22 9y ago
Man, you're banging rocks together and working hard, rather than smart. My sympathies for being stuck with a crapfest like sourcesafe.

skinnymuch 9y ago

Your status reasoning seems weak. Archive? Version control will have it in history. Maybe rarely you want it around for active references. Otherwise you likely don't need it. The author bit is solved with version control. Much better than a line that can get bogged down with multiple authors or be outdated. It doesn't feel like you're being old fashioned or old school. It seems like you're being a bit stubborn in your ways. Version control is a good thing. Perhaps there's better ways. Going your way with not having an sort of real alternative isn't right though. Your other reasons like coming back years later can be applied to version control too. It's helpful to have commits that have diffs, time stamps, author, and other meta data. Imagine having to come back 3 years later without any of that. Commit history might help you remember and manage your project more quickly, efficiently, and effectively.