I’d go easy with the recommendation to couple components loosely. If you make things that belong together loosely coupled, you’ve created obfuscation, and added complexity to your codebase. Loose coupling makes sense, but not everywhere.
If higher-ups complain about intempestive code refactoring, it’s always a good idea to stop for a moment and to start becoming less trigger-happy with refactors. It’s OK to take some time to determine what actual value refactors bring to the project in tangible terms - intuition is not enough. Convincing a critical manager is a good start, because their tolerance for programmer bullshit is low if they don’t actually write code.
Very often, and this is especially prevalent among junior programmers who care about what they do, the reasoning for refactoring turns out to be something along the lines of “I don’t like this” or “I read some cool blog article saying things should be done that way”, without any care about whether or not the change in question is actually improving anything, or, if it does, if the improvement is worth the degradation in terms of quality (new bugs)/maintainability (added genericity making the code more difficult to understand, cryptic features of the language being used that make it hard to understand what’s going on, I’m sure there’s other examples…)
The problem is you often get in cases where the developer cannot back their intuition that something is actually harmful with facts. When it’s not just pure bikeshedding about code they don’t like and falsely claim to be a ticking timebomb, they fail to weigh the risks of leaving slightly offputting code in the codebase against the risks associated with significant code changes in general, which, even with tests, will still inevitably break.
Developers of all sorts tend to vastly overestimate how dangerous a piece of code may be.
To be clear, while I’ve seen it with other developers, I’m still guilty of this myself to this day. I’m not saying I’m any better than anybody.
It’s just that I’ve seen how disruptive refactoring can be, and, while it is often necessary, I thought it would be important to mention that I think it should be done with care.
If you can convince a manager with rational arguments in terms of product quality, it can be a good way to make the case for a refactor, because your manager probably won’t be impressed by arguments about unimportant nuances we developers obsess about.
Async is weird, and the generics salad stuff is clunky.
Just my gut feeling as well.
It is red, so it adds up 😆
It doesn’t have the position, but it has the color 🤣
Oh sorry, I thought you were mocking the person you replied to because they were trying to redefine truth somehow.
They sometimes do, just look at what Musk is doing. They also bribe donate to the democrats in an effort to influence them (this is lobbying).
Why do anything illegal, when you can bribe and defame in the media you own? It looks a lot less suspicious and is a lot more sustainable.
Unless something changes, the rich have basically sabotaged the democratic party into being a center-right party. That’s why it won’t be a left-wing party in the foreseeable future.
If you don’t believe me, just look up why the Democrats tolerate the Manchins and the Sinemas within their ranks.
Whatever you may think, rich people do donate to the democrats too †
Given that the orange clown may not win the election, they need to bribe democrats into doing their bidding. This is what lobbies do.
Well, you’re right they do sell newspapers. Their first issue was about rehabilitating Lenin, so I wouldn’t be so quick to dismiss them as Trotskyists.
I know what the outcomes look like when the “left” represses the right and everybody else, including themselves. And your failure to see how undesirable those outcomes may be to leftists around the world is precisely the beef we have against Lemmygrad, Nazbear and tankies in general. You do not represent us, and we’ll never be allies. Even worse, you guys actively sabotage leftism by keeping red-scare era scarecrows alive. I’m glad you’re such an insignificant minority that we can contain, to be quite frank. The tankie problem used to be way worse on Lemmy less than a year ago.
I know my local revolutionnary/communist party, despite being leninist, is fiercely anti-Stalin, for instance. The fixation on defending totalitarianism is frankly bizarre.
By using the kind of the repression they used on the public, they proved they were no better than the capitalists they despise so much.
Someone that actually cares about left-wing politics cares a lot more about the outcomes than which faction comes ahead. Politics aren’t a game of Risk. Actions have consequences, and humanity as a whole loses when innocents get killed by brainwashed idiots.
If stalinist Russia is what utopia is supposed to be, I’m not interested, thank you.
I acknowledge that. But what “struggle” means is not an unimportant detail. And I disagree with the Stalinist approach viscerally, and it isn’t in accordance with leftist values by any stretch of the imagination.
That’s precisely the extent of my criticism. Understanding stalinism instead of just demonizing it is a good thing, if only to avoid repeating the same mistakes. But the end doesn’t justify the means. Apologism is not OK.
It’s OK to take a stance against power abuses, and vital to denounce them if you consider yourself a leftist.
The problem is the violence of the totalitarian regimes you defend harms innocents too, which is why serious communists shouldn’t advocate for that kind of power abuse any more than they should advocate for Western imperialism. It’s not that hard.
Yeah I get to do that, because that’s what happened factually, sorry. No amount of whataboutism will change that. I don’t care about Western imperialists, fuck them too.
And you guys won’t reach any mainstream audience to spread your bile. Sorry!
You guys can’t help yourselves. Anyone interested can read the Nazbear slip-ups in this thread. You don’t even to do any hardcore research.
Not my experience. I’ve had the displeasure of having to use Rider at work, and it’s much slower than VSCode, if only for boot times which are a pain in the butt for large projects. You gotta pay for that bloat and feature creep somehow.
And that’s on a Xeon machine.
As for refactoring, yes, Rider has lots of options that don’t work and do half the job. So much so, that I don’t use them at all, because they’re unreliable.
The requirement for Copilot to qualify an IDE is a bit funny. First, VSCode has some support for it, and, secondly, this is super recent, so unless IDEs didn’t exist since last year, I’d say this is not core to the definition of IDE.