4 ms·

> The maintainer also has been pretty rude to me about this on HN. This is AFAIK the only other interaction we've had: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=410

> The maintainer also has been pretty rude to me about this on HN. This is AFAIK the only other interaction we've had: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41051587 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41051587 If there are other interactions we've had, feel free to link them. Then others can decide how rude I'm being instead of relying only on your characterization. > but it's still crazy to think people won't be caught off guard by this behavior Straw-manning is also crazy. :-) People have and will absolutely be caught off guard by the behavior. On the flip side, as I said 9 months ago, ripgrep's default behavior is easily one of the most cited positive features of ripgrep aside from its performance. The other crazy thing here is... you don't have to use ripgrep! It is very specifically intended as a departure from traditional grep behavior. Because if you want traditional grep behavior, then you can just use grep. Hence why ripgrep's binary name is not `grep`, unlike the many implementations of POSIX grep. > Its name is literally indicating it's a grep replacement. I also tried to correct this 9 months ago too. See also: https://github.com/BurntSushi/ripgrep/blob/master/FAQ.md#posix4ever https://github.com/BurntSushi/ripgrep/blob/master/FAQ.md#pos... For anyone else following along at home, if you want ripgrep to search the same files that GNU grep searches, then do `rg -uuu`. Or, if you don't want ripgrep to respect your gitignores but ignore hidden and binary files, then do `rg -u`. It makes sense that folks might be caught off guard by ripgrep's default filtering. This is why I try to mitigate it by stating very clearly that it is going to ignore stuff by default in the first one or two sentences about ripgrep (README, man page, CHANGELOG, project description). I also try to mitigate it by making it very easy to disable this default behavior. These mitigations exist precisely because I know the default behavior can be surprising, in direct contradiction to "but it's still crazy to think people won't be caught off guard by this behavior."

godelski 1y ago
Not gonna lie, that was a bit creepy. We're deep in a day old thread that you have no other comments in. Do you scrape HN looking for mentions of ripgrep? Forgive me if I'm a bit surprised! I still stand that silent errors are significantly worse than loud ones | it's worse to not get files you're expecting vs get more files than you're expecting. In the later case there's a pretty clear indication you need to filter while in the former there's no signal that anything is wrong. This is objectively a worse case. > The other crazy thing here is... you don't have to use ripgrep! If it wasn't clear, I don't ;) I don't think grep ignoring .gitignore files is "a bug". Like you said, defaults matter. Like I said, build artifacts are one of the most common things for me to grep. Where we strongly disagree is that I believe aliases should be used to add functionality, where you believe that it should be used to remove functionality. I don't want to start another fight (so not linking the last). We're never going to see eye-to-eye on this issue so there's no reason to rehash it.
- burntsushi 1y ago
  > I don't think grep ignoring .gitignore files is "a bug". I don't either? Like... wat. Lol. > Where we strongly disagree is that I believe aliases should be used to add functionality, where you believe that it should be used to remove functionality. Not universally, not at all! There's plenty of other stuff in ripgrep that you need to opt into that isn't enabled by default (like trimming long lines). There's also counter examples in GNU grep itself. For example, you have to opt out of GNU grep's default mode of replacing NUL bytes with newline terminators via the `-a/--text` flag (which is not part of POSIX). Instead what I try to do is look at the pros and cons of specific behaviors on their own. I'm also willing to take risks. We already have lots of standard grep tools to choose from. ripgrep takes a different approach and tons of users appreciate that behavior. > We're never going to see eye-to-eye on this issue so there's no reason to rehash it. Oh I'm happy not to rehash it. But I will defend my name and seek to clarify claims about stuff I've built. So if you don't want to rehash it, then don't. I won't seek you specifically out. > I don't want to start another fight (so not linking the last). To be clear, I would link it if I knew what you were referring to. I linked our other interaction by doing a web search for `site:news.ycombinator.com "burntsushi" "godelski"`. > If it wasn't clear, I don't ;) OK, so you don't use ripgrep. But you're complaining about it on a public forum. Calling me rude. Calling me creepy. And then whinging about not wanting to rehash things. I mean c'mon buddy. Totally cool to complain even if you don't use it, but don't get all shocked pikachu when I chime in to clarify things you've said.
  - godelski 1y ago
    > Calling me creepy I didn't call you creepy. I said it was creepy that you appears seemingly out of nowhere is a very unexpected place. I'm only giving this distinction because this category of error has happened a few times.
    - 63stack 1y ago
      "I didn't call you creepy, I called your behavior creepy". This is just rhetorics.

godelski 1y ago

Not gonna lie, that was a bit creepy. We're deep in a day old thread that you have no other comments in. Do you scrape HN looking for mentions of ripgrep? Forgive me if I'm a bit surprised! I still stand that silent errors are significantly worse than loud ones | it's worse to not get files you're expecting vs get more files than you're expecting. In the later case there's a pretty clear indication you need to filter while in the former there's no signal that anything is wrong. This is objectively a worse case. > The other crazy thing here is... you don't have to use ripgrep! If it wasn't clear, I don't ;) I don't think grep ignoring .gitignore files is "a bug". Like you said, defaults matter. Like I said, build artifacts are one of the most common things for me to grep. Where we strongly disagree is that I believe aliases should be used to add functionality, where you believe that it should be used to remove functionality. I don't want to start another fight (so not linking the last). We're never going to see eye-to-eye on this issue so there's no reason to rehash it.

burntsushi 1y ago
> I don't think grep ignoring .gitignore files is "a bug". I don't either? Like... wat. Lol. > Where we strongly disagree is that I believe aliases should be used to add functionality, where you believe that it should be used to remove functionality. Not universally, not at all! There's plenty of other stuff in ripgrep that you need to opt into that isn't enabled by default (like trimming long lines). There's also counter examples in GNU grep itself. For example, you have to opt out of GNU grep's default mode of replacing NUL bytes with newline terminators via the `-a/--text` flag (which is not part of POSIX). Instead what I try to do is look at the pros and cons of specific behaviors on their own. I'm also willing to take risks. We already have lots of standard grep tools to choose from. ripgrep takes a different approach and tons of users appreciate that behavior. > We're never going to see eye-to-eye on this issue so there's no reason to rehash it. Oh I'm happy not to rehash it. But I will defend my name and seek to clarify claims about stuff I've built. So if you don't want to rehash it, then don't. I won't seek you specifically out. > I don't want to start another fight (so not linking the last). To be clear, I would link it if I knew what you were referring to. I linked our other interaction by doing a web search for `site:news.ycombinator.com "burntsushi" "godelski"`. > If it wasn't clear, I don't ;) OK, so you don't use ripgrep. But you're complaining about it on a public forum. Calling me rude. Calling me creepy. And then whinging about not wanting to rehash things. I mean c'mon buddy. Totally cool to complain even if you don't use it, but don't get all shocked pikachu when I chime in to clarify things you've said.
- godelski 1y ago
  > Calling me creepy I didn't call you creepy. I said it was creepy that you appears seemingly out of nowhere is a very unexpected place. I'm only giving this distinction because this category of error has happened a few times.
  - 63stack 1y ago
    "I didn't call you creepy, I called your behavior creepy". This is just rhetorics.