5 ms·

What an oddly arrogant post, there's been a Protobuf LSP available for years: https://github.com/lasorda/protobuf-language-server https://github.com/lasorda/pro

What an oddly arrogant post, there's been a Protobuf LSP available for years: https://github.com/lasorda/protobuf-language-server https://github.com/lasorda/protobuf-language-server

llm_nerd 2mo ago
The bizarre "you're welcome" in the title is so obnoxious that I was sure it would be related to some sort of funny twist in the blog entry. Nope, they really thought that was appropriate.
- colechristensen 2mo ago
  surely we're not a community so unfamiliar with lacking social skills and this aberration isn't at all important to the topic at hand
- Dylan16807 2mo ago
  It sounds like you're having a bad day or something. Putting "you're welcome" in the title of your own blog, on a free software release, is fine. It's not pushed into anyone's face. It loses some points for being a corporate ad but that would happen regardless of wording.
  - otterley 2mo ago
    I think it makes the author sound like a dick. Test for yourself: next time you take out the garbage, loudly tell your partner or roommate, “I took out the garbage. You’re welcome.”
    - Dylan16807 2mo ago
      That's a shared chore. Do you not see the obvious differences in the situation? If they said "you're welcome" about an obligation like paying taxes and also made it very personal, then it would be close in feeling to your scenario. But it's not. If you offer a genuine gift, in a situation where there is no expectation of payback or debt, you can say you're welcome.
      - otterley 2mo ago
        It’s impolite and weird to say “you’re welcome” when offering a gift for which the recipient did not first express gratitude. It follows “thank you;” it does not precede it. Try this instead: give a stranger a piece of pre-chewed gum and say “you’re welcome!” Hell, even if it’s not pre-chewed, it’s just presumptuous and rude. You have no idea if they value it or not. They might not even like it. Even if my barista handed me the coffee I ordered and said “you’re welcome” before I thanked them first, I’d think they’re a little off kilter.
        igetspam 2mo ago
        Sounds like a you problem. If someone did me a service and told me I was welcome, my take would be entirely based on the delivery of the phrase. I don’t even know what to do with the gum analogy because that’s just nonsense.
        otterley 2mo ago
        I don't think it's just a "me" "problem"; there are many others who agree with my perspective in this discussion. Take a look around.
        Dylan16807 2mo ago
        Remember that this is a post on their website. They're not pushing it onto anyone. So it's not like the gum. > Even if my barista handed me the coffee I ordered and said “you’re welcome” before I thanked them first, I’d think they’re a little off kilter. Jeez... But also that's a conversation where you can thank them first. That part isn't applicable to a post like this.
    - hinkley 2mo ago
      [flagged]
      - otterley 2mo ago
        We’re talking about basic etiquette here. I don’t have to manufacture it. If the score on my comment (which I know you can’t see but you’ll have to take my word for it) and other comments in this discussion that express similar sentiment are any indication (among them, “arrogant” and “obnoxious”), I’m by no means the only person who feels this way. Try my experiments yourself if you disagree, and come back and let us all know how they went for you.
      - antonvs 2mo ago
        Perhaps you're unfamiliar with the common passive-agressive use of "you're welcome" in exactly the kind of context the OP article uses it. But it's a thing, even if you haven't come across it.
        hinkley 2mo ago
        I am well familiar with passive aggressive. This isn’t how you fight it, is the point. Getting worked up is exactly the goal. Go outside. All of you.
        samsari 2mo ago
        Are you as familiar with "condescending" as you are with "passive aggressive"?
        hinkley 2mo ago
        I am not being condescending. I save that for folks who start it. You don’t want to see me being condescending. Well actually you do, as long as it’s not aimed at you and you get popcorn.
        llm_nerd 2mo ago
        Who is getting worked up? Who is "outraged", or looking to "manufacture" it? I mean, the only person these descriptions apply to in this discussion is you. Google's blog title is weird. Every normal human being that speaks English will find it weird. Maybe the author is on the spectrum, or maybe they thought their humour would carry better in a technical blog. Your agreement with this is not at all our concern. Maybe you should go outside and settle down?
  - saghm 2mo ago
    Saying "you're welcome" without a "thank you" preceding will sound passive aggressive to quite a lot of people; it's the type of thing that a parent does to chide a small child who forgets their manners in the same way they might prompt a child with "What's the magic word?" if they grabbed at something without saying please. If this doesn't make sense to you, I'm not sure there's much anyone can do to convince you, because it's purely social convention. It's certainly possible that the author didn't realize it either, but having to deal with reactions about word choice when putting out writing explicitly for public consumption kinda comes with the territory. This goes for Hacker News comments too of course, but as someone with no horse in this race, your interference about their word choice seems like much more of a stretch than theirs about the author. Not recognizing that a title to a blog post will evoke a negative reactions in a lot of readers does genuinely seem like information about the author socially in a way that having that common negative reaction does not.
    - Dylan16807 2mo ago
      How is a thank you supposed to precede it in a blog post? The social convention is for conversations.
      - saghm 2mo ago
        It literally can't precede it, that's the entire point that's being made; it sounds rude in a blog post because the social expectations are being violated. When social convention says a phrase is rude in certain circumstances, and those circumstances are not (or cannot) be met, then social convention say that the phrase is rude. You seem incredulous at the idea that some things that might be socially acceptable in conversational circumstances would not be perceived similarly in published writing, but I don't really understand why. There are all sorts of things that might not cause someone to bat an eye in a spoken conversation that are much more difficult to use in writing.
        Dylan16807 2mo ago
        You say that expectation is violated here, I say it doesn't apply here. I don't think we're going to resolve this difference in view. But please stop making wild guesses about how I handle broad categories of communication when I'm commenting on one specific case. I don't say it doesn't make sense. I'm not incredulous. That's really obnoxious.
- 0xfffafaCrash 2mo ago
  I’ve seen similar wording from colleagues on the ASD (with Asperger’s). It can be hard for some people to navigate the nuances between usage of a tongue-in-cheek usage of the phrase which is more socially acceptable or humorous from the version that reads as arrogant
  - deleted 2mo ago
    [deleted]
- bufbuild 2mo ago
  Fair enough - feedback taken, we don't have a second career in comedy! Appreciate the feedback - we're renaming the post once GitHub is back online, and are adding the following to it for transparency: > Edit: In full transparency, this blog post was originally titled "Protobuf finally has LSP support. You're Welcome." We thought this might generate some interest, but unfortunately this post sat unloved for months. Then, out of the blue, this post decided to make front page HN, and we received some choice feedback on our use of "You're Welcome" and our poor comedic abilities. Fair enough, we appreciate you speaking up - and we of course *thank you* for your continued support of our work!
  - bheadmaster 2mo ago
    Make sure to take reporting negativity bias into account. People will speak up when they don't like something, while stay quiet when everything is fine. I, personally, enjoy Buf. It has solved many frustrations I've had with The Way it was previously done, manually installing protoc plugins, writing arcane flags into scripts nobody wants to touch, working around various quirks, like how protoc produces different output based on which directory you invoke it in, et cetera... I don't quite like the remote plugin model and rate limiting, but using local plugins is easy enough that it doesn't matter. Buf has made my life easier, and I've actually been using `buf_ls` for a while now in NeoVim. I understand where the criticism of the title comes from, but I don't personally feel it in this particular case. In fact, I didn't even notice it. I don't even mind the monetized properietary cloud thing, as long as Buf CLI and the related toolchain remains free software, serving the community. Hope you won't do the ol' switcharoo any time soon.
    - bufbuild 2mo ago
      Totally, and we appreciate the sentiment. But the title was meant to be lighthearted, and instead it clearly struck a nerve. That's not our intent, and it was easy to change, so we just swallowed our pride. We rather the conversation be around Protobuf tooling, and not our poor comedy. And the Buf CLI will always be free and OSS, don't worry!
sudorandom 2mo ago
The difference is that Buf's LSP is fully spec-complete since it's built on the same tooling that powers the buf CLI. I've seen several attempts at Protobuf LSPs over the years, but none that actually conform to the Protobuf specification, including the one you linked. That project is built on `emicklei/proto`, which readily accepts broken Protobuf and always has. The author says so in the README: "Current parser implementation is not completely validating .proto definitions." Maybe Buf should update the headline to "Protobuf finally has LSP support that works."

What an oddly arrogant post, there's been a Protobuf LSP available for years: https://github.com/lasorda/protobuf-language-server https://github.com/lasorda/protobuf-language-server

llm_nerd 2mo ago

The bizarre "you're welcome" in the title is so obnoxious that I was sure it would be related to some sort of funny twist in the blog entry. Nope, they really thought that was appropriate.

colechristensen 2mo ago
surely we're not a community so unfamiliar with lacking social skills and this aberration isn't at all important to the topic at hand
Dylan16807 2mo ago
It sounds like you're having a bad day or something. Putting "you're welcome" in the title of your own blog, on a free software release, is fine. It's not pushed into anyone's face. It loses some points for being a corporate ad but that would happen regardless of wording.
- otterley 2mo ago
  I think it makes the author sound like a dick. Test for yourself: next time you take out the garbage, loudly tell your partner or roommate, “I took out the garbage. You’re welcome.”
  - Dylan16807 2mo ago
    That's a shared chore. Do you not see the obvious differences in the situation? If they said "you're welcome" about an obligation like paying taxes and also made it very personal, then it would be close in feeling to your scenario. But it's not. If you offer a genuine gift, in a situation where there is no expectation of payback or debt, you can say you're welcome.
    - otterley 2mo ago
      It’s impolite and weird to say “you’re welcome” when offering a gift for which the recipient did not first express gratitude. It follows “thank you;” it does not precede it. Try this instead: give a stranger a piece of pre-chewed gum and say “you’re welcome!” Hell, even if it’s not pre-chewed, it’s just presumptuous and rude. You have no idea if they value it or not. They might not even like it. Even if my barista handed me the coffee I ordered and said “you’re welcome” before I thanked them first, I’d think they’re a little off kilter.
      - igetspam 2mo ago
        Sounds like a you problem. If someone did me a service and told me I was welcome, my take would be entirely based on the delivery of the phrase. I don’t even know what to do with the gum analogy because that’s just nonsense.
        otterley 2mo ago
        I don't think it's just a "me" "problem"; there are many others who agree with my perspective in this discussion. Take a look around.
      - Dylan16807 2mo ago
        Remember that this is a post on their website. They're not pushing it onto anyone. So it's not like the gum. > Even if my barista handed me the coffee I ordered and said “you’re welcome” before I thanked them first, I’d think they’re a little off kilter. Jeez... But also that's a conversation where you can thank them first. That part isn't applicable to a post like this.
  - hinkley 2mo ago
    [flagged]
    - otterley 2mo ago
      We’re talking about basic etiquette here. I don’t have to manufacture it. If the score on my comment (which I know you can’t see but you’ll have to take my word for it) and other comments in this discussion that express similar sentiment are any indication (among them, “arrogant” and “obnoxious”), I’m by no means the only person who feels this way. Try my experiments yourself if you disagree, and come back and let us all know how they went for you.
    - antonvs 2mo ago
      Perhaps you're unfamiliar with the common passive-agressive use of "you're welcome" in exactly the kind of context the OP article uses it. But it's a thing, even if you haven't come across it.
      - hinkley 2mo ago
        I am well familiar with passive aggressive. This isn’t how you fight it, is the point. Getting worked up is exactly the goal. Go outside. All of you.
        samsari 2mo ago
        Are you as familiar with "condescending" as you are with "passive aggressive"?
        hinkley 2mo ago
        I am not being condescending. I save that for folks who start it. You don’t want to see me being condescending. Well actually you do, as long as it’s not aimed at you and you get popcorn.
        llm_nerd 2mo ago
        Who is getting worked up? Who is "outraged", or looking to "manufacture" it? I mean, the only person these descriptions apply to in this discussion is you. Google's blog title is weird. Every normal human being that speaks English will find it weird. Maybe the author is on the spectrum, or maybe they thought their humour would carry better in a technical blog. Your agreement with this is not at all our concern. Maybe you should go outside and settle down?
- saghm 2mo ago
  Saying "you're welcome" without a "thank you" preceding will sound passive aggressive to quite a lot of people; it's the type of thing that a parent does to chide a small child who forgets their manners in the same way they might prompt a child with "What's the magic word?" if they grabbed at something without saying please. If this doesn't make sense to you, I'm not sure there's much anyone can do to convince you, because it's purely social convention. It's certainly possible that the author didn't realize it either, but having to deal with reactions about word choice when putting out writing explicitly for public consumption kinda comes with the territory. This goes for Hacker News comments too of course, but as someone with no horse in this race, your interference about their word choice seems like much more of a stretch than theirs about the author. Not recognizing that a title to a blog post will evoke a negative reactions in a lot of readers does genuinely seem like information about the author socially in a way that having that common negative reaction does not.
  - Dylan16807 2mo ago
    How is a thank you supposed to precede it in a blog post? The social convention is for conversations.
    - saghm 2mo ago
      It literally can't precede it, that's the entire point that's being made; it sounds rude in a blog post because the social expectations are being violated. When social convention says a phrase is rude in certain circumstances, and those circumstances are not (or cannot) be met, then social convention say that the phrase is rude. You seem incredulous at the idea that some things that might be socially acceptable in conversational circumstances would not be perceived similarly in published writing, but I don't really understand why. There are all sorts of things that might not cause someone to bat an eye in a spoken conversation that are much more difficult to use in writing.
      - Dylan16807 2mo ago
        You say that expectation is violated here, I say it doesn't apply here. I don't think we're going to resolve this difference in view. But please stop making wild guesses about how I handle broad categories of communication when I'm commenting on one specific case. I don't say it doesn't make sense. I'm not incredulous. That's really obnoxious.
0xfffafaCrash 2mo ago
I’ve seen similar wording from colleagues on the ASD (with Asperger’s). It can be hard for some people to navigate the nuances between usage of a tongue-in-cheek usage of the phrase which is more socially acceptable or humorous from the version that reads as arrogant
- deleted 2mo ago
  [deleted]
bufbuild 2mo ago
Fair enough - feedback taken, we don't have a second career in comedy! Appreciate the feedback - we're renaming the post once GitHub is back online, and are adding the following to it for transparency: > Edit: In full transparency, this blog post was originally titled "Protobuf finally has LSP support. You're Welcome." We thought this might generate some interest, but unfortunately this post sat unloved for months. Then, out of the blue, this post decided to make front page HN, and we received some choice feedback on our use of "You're Welcome" and our poor comedic abilities. Fair enough, we appreciate you speaking up - and we of course *thank you* for your continued support of our work!
- bheadmaster 2mo ago
  Make sure to take reporting negativity bias into account. People will speak up when they don't like something, while stay quiet when everything is fine. I, personally, enjoy Buf. It has solved many frustrations I've had with The Way it was previously done, manually installing protoc plugins, writing arcane flags into scripts nobody wants to touch, working around various quirks, like how protoc produces different output based on which directory you invoke it in, et cetera... I don't quite like the remote plugin model and rate limiting, but using local plugins is easy enough that it doesn't matter. Buf has made my life easier, and I've actually been using `buf_ls` for a while now in NeoVim. I understand where the criticism of the title comes from, but I don't personally feel it in this particular case. In fact, I didn't even notice it. I don't even mind the monetized properietary cloud thing, as long as Buf CLI and the related toolchain remains free software, serving the community. Hope you won't do the ol' switcharoo any time soon.
  - bufbuild 2mo ago
    Totally, and we appreciate the sentiment. But the title was meant to be lighthearted, and instead it clearly struck a nerve. That's not our intent, and it was easy to change, so we just swallowed our pride. We rather the conversation be around Protobuf tooling, and not our poor comedy. And the Buf CLI will always be free and OSS, don't worry!

sudorandom 2mo ago

The difference is that Buf's LSP is fully spec-complete since it's built on the same tooling that powers the buf CLI. I've seen several attempts at Protobuf LSPs over the years, but none that actually conform to the Protobuf specification, including the one you linked. That project is built on `emicklei/proto`, which readily accepts broken Protobuf and always has. The author says so in the README: "Current parser implementation is not completely validating .proto definitions." Maybe Buf should update the headline to "Protobuf finally has LSP support that works."