Y
HN Search
Hacker News Search
new
|
comments
|
top
|
jobs
cerved
searching PlanetScale…
1.
▲
2.
▲
3.
▲
4.
▲
5.
▲
6.
▲
8 ms
·
121.
▲
by
cerved
3y ago
which edge cases?
122.
▲
by
cerved
3y ago
Or you just move the repository to a different protect
123.
▲
by
cerved
3y ago
Worse, PR tools like Azure DevOps (and GitHub?) don't do a good job of displaying the information. Just a big diff. I often get asked about the reason for a change in a review comment, even when there's a thorough description in t
124.
▲
by
cerved
3y ago
Agreed. I'll settle for good commit hygiene over good commit messages. It often seems a tough ask to have both
125.
▲
by
cerved
3y ago
Right. The massive commit with minimal description and a PR number which I can look up in Azure DevOps to find a review with no description, no discussion and a mention of a number I can go and look up in Jira, where some Scrum master wrote
126.
▲
by
cerved
3y ago
Those "engineers" go on _The List_
127.
▲
by
cerved
3y ago
The example in the blog post would be a much better example if some kind of test or linting step was added to catch these white-space errors, to explain the need for catching such errors. Pro tip, you can write both comments and commit mess
128.
▲
by
cerved
3y ago
Presumably you're referring to commit subjects. And no, they should absolutely not be as long as you like. It breaks things
129.
▲
by
cerved
3y ago
Using vim-fugitive it's :Git blame %
130.
▲
by
cerved
3y ago
They were quoting the article, which complains that "shells are too slow to start", with examples of running echo in non-interactive shells. Nobody is talking about the startup time of interactive shells.
131.
▲
by
cerved
3y ago
Why would you need to optimize the config? I'm not talking about running an interactive shell.
132.
▲
by
cerved
3y ago
I just do everything within WSL2 which works well enough for my needs
133.
▲
by
cerved
3y ago
An absolutely ludicrous point, shells have some of the fastest startup times of all processes
134.
▲
by
cerved
3y ago
it also switches focus window, which is makes things even more confusing
135.
▲
by
cerved
3y ago
I believe it's compliant but only in the sense that the end result is unspecified by POSIX. I.e. you can't rely on this working on a POSIX compliant system
136.
▲
by
cerved
3y ago
I don't expect anything to work in Teams
137.
▲
by
cerved
3y ago
or the git book
138.
▲
by
cerved
3y ago
I think it's great if thinking of commits in the context of commits in a rebase as diffs works for you. I only caution against it because there are many situations during a rebase where the results can be very confusing with such a per
139.
▲
by
cerved
3y ago
Regarding rebase, I disagree. Thinking about a branch as a series of diffs can lead to a lot of unexpected outcomes
140.
▲
by
cerved
3y ago
> This is especially apparent in the case of rebases, where the snapshot model falls completely on its side (modifying a commit will cause the same change in all subsequent commits). I disagree. During a rebase is precisely the t
141.
▲
by
cerved
3y ago
If you do git add . && git commit -m wip then git first checks which files have changed, taking the shortcut of checking if the files mtime is newer than the current index. This is basically the speed of find . For fil
142.
▲
by
cerved
3y ago
Yes, that's the annealing part. Otherwise it's just local search
143.
▲
by
cerved
3y ago
oh cool, I didn't know that, thanks
144.
▲
by
cerved
3y ago
because squashing multiple changes into one change for the sake of decluttering is irreversible and also unnecessary, since whomever wants to view the log in such a squashed manner can do so with a flag
145.
▲
by
cerved
3y ago
no, that's the not sensible alternative
146.
▲
by
cerved
3y ago
Let's not forget people that commit trailing whitespace, or different line-endings. Can we put those on a separate List?
147.
▲
by
cerved
3y ago
That's not what happened
148.
▲
by
cerved
3y ago
Because it's much easier to rebase ontop of and it declutters the important commits. Typically, you git log main --first-parent
149.
▲
by
cerved
3y ago
Pretty sure the answer is no
150.
▲
by
cerved
3y ago
If a long line can't be hardwrapped nicely at 80 chars, it typically means there's room for improvement in the actual code.
More ›