3 ms·

Are you sure its considered a no-no? Gitlab has it integrated as part of the PR interface. https://docs.gitlab.com/ee/user/project/merge_requests/squash_and_mer

Are you sure its considered a no-no? Gitlab has it integrated as part of the PR interface. https://docs.gitlab.com/ee/user/project/merge_requests/squash_and_merge.html https://docs.gitlab.com/ee/user/project/merge_requests/squas... > Do you mean linters that enforce maximum line widths? That seems increasingly rare these days. Yes, that is what I mean, and I see it more and more because some think passing a linter test will make your code good.

bluntfang 8y ago
>some think passing a linter test will make your code good. Who thinks this?
- delecti 8y ago
  At first I read this and thought "well nobody probably thinks that exact thought, but lots of people think they help you avoid mistakes". Then I scrolled down and read a comment that said: > A couple of those points could be boiled down to "use a strict linter with most of the rules turned on". Now I'm not so sure.
  - munchbunny 8y ago
    I saw someone else on HN use the word "glib", which I think applies here. It has a kernel of truth and sounds good, but there are very obvious reasons why "it passes the linter" is an insufficient condition for good code.
munchbunny 8y ago
> Are you sure its considered a no-no? Gitlab has it integrated as part of the PR interface. Good point. I was careful to say "big" as well as "multi-purpose", because I think most of us are more comfortable with "big" commits than "multi-purpose" commits, and a commit that is both should send off red flags. Specifically, it's hard to code review multi-purpose commits because you have to think more extensively about the side effects, risks, regressions, etc. for unrelated changes that are lumped together. If it's a small commit, that tends to not be an issue, but if you're touching several unrelated areas in a big commit, it gets really tough. And as a general best practice, you want your code to be easy to review.

bluntfang 8y ago

>some think passing a linter test will make your code good. Who thinks this?

delecti 8y ago
At first I read this and thought "well nobody probably thinks that exact thought, but lots of people think they help you avoid mistakes". Then I scrolled down and read a comment that said: > A couple of those points could be boiled down to "use a strict linter with most of the rules turned on". Now I'm not so sure.
- munchbunny 8y ago
  I saw someone else on HN use the word "glib", which I think applies here. It has a kernel of truth and sounds good, but there are very obvious reasons why "it passes the linter" is an insufficient condition for good code.

munchbunny 8y ago

> Are you sure its considered a no-no? Gitlab has it integrated as part of the PR interface. Good point. I was careful to say "big" as well as "multi-purpose", because I think most of us are more comfortable with "big" commits than "multi-purpose" commits, and a commit that is both should send off red flags. Specifically, it's hard to code review multi-purpose commits because you have to think more extensively about the side effects, risks, regressions, etc. for unrelated changes that are lumped together. If it's a small commit, that tends to not be an issue, but if you're touching several unrelated areas in a big commit, it gets really tough. And as a general best practice, you want your code to be easy to review.