4 ms·
Git pissed
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- uxp 13y agoLooks like you're probably running it with Ruby 1.8, and it's using the Ruby 1.9 Hash syntax. Try to run it with 1.9, either through something like RVM, rbenv or chruby, or with any other number of distribution installers.
- moron4hire 13y agoI love cursing more than most people, but it doesn't belong in my code.
- jlgreco 13y agoI agree. I love cursing, but I think it works best in more ephemeral situations. In conversation (spoken, written, or otherwise) it works great but in official records that will be often revisited (whether they are source code comments or commit messages) the cursing will eventually come off as tacky as the emotional context that warranted it is lost in time. If I am browsing through source from 10 years ago, it may help me if a comment alerts me that "this fucking cockstain of a function broke prod", but really there is no connect between me and the emotion that warranted the profanity. I need more context, otherwise it seems tacky. (I think that recorded conversation, although not ephemeral, retains the emotional context necessary for profanity to 'work')
- moron4hire 13y agothat is exactly right
- hnriot 13y agoit would also get one in trouble at many companies. Anyone's that's ever been through an acquisition will know that due diligence includes code scans - it's highly unprofessional to let cursing into a code base.
- btilly 13y agoI am confused by the suggestion that the word "love" would indicate happiness. Usually when I use that in source code, I'm being sarcastic. As in, Don't you love the fact that Google's API documentation is inaccurate?
- ffn 13y agok, brb, building a git sarcastic tool
- anigbrowl 13y agoYes, but statistically that will be mere noise, just like I love love love this algorithm or this algorithm works hand in g love with that other one.
- jlgreco 13y agoMaybe. It is possible that the word is used sarcastically more often than literally though. For instance, it wouldn't surprise me to learn that the word "literally" may actually be used more often to mean "not literally".
- joshschreuder 13y ago'Literally' is already in the OED as 'not literally': http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/10240917/Uproar-as-OED-includes-erroneous-use-of-literally.html http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/10240917/Uproar-as-OED-...
- leephillips 13y agoIndeed! http://lee-phillips.org/literallyEgregious/ http://lee-phillips.org/literallyEgregious/
- skyebook 13y agoThis is probably a homage to the original Linux Kernel Fuck Count[1] which included love in its search. http://durak.org/sean/pubs/kfc/ http://durak.org/sean/pubs/kfc/
- erikig 13y agoI like this, I'd probably use it to track the number of TODO's that are added to the code over time.
- stan_rogers 13y agoI've found out why they build up — it seems that the elves have been ignoring them for years now. Makes no sense, I know, but they've gone back to making shoes overnight. It doesn't matter how many times I write TODO, it never actually gets done unless I do it myself anymore.
- jyz 13y agoThis reminds me of http://commitlogsfromlastnight.com/ http://commitlogsfromlastnight.com/
- phireal 13y agoHaving the rate of change rather than the number of words might be a better indicator of how stressed a particular group are at a given time.