Interesting. It looks like that was the case in the past but they eventually adapted https://vimeo.com/blog/post/new-upload-rules/
Interesting. It looks like that was the case in the past but they eventually adapted https://vimeo.com/blog/post/new-upload-rules/
My mantra has always been to bring solutions not problems. Applying that to code reviews makes for a far more productive experience.
Rather than just pointing out errors in code help the developer with prompts towards the solution.
Or, if you’re too lazy to explain why something shouldn’t be done then why should another developer have to act on your criticism?
I wish this had been my experience. I pushed for so long in my last company for standards to be written, code formatters implemented and objectivity to be brought to reviews but it was always ignored.
Instead I had to endure every employee who claimed seniority (in a non hierarchical company) subjecting their opinion on style in reviews. It came up the point that I dreaded having to work with specific people because they kept triggering my PTSD with their moving target of micro management.
Only afterwards did I truly appreciate how poor a lot of their opinions were. Now one of my first questions when approaching a new project is what standards we’re following. If they look at me blank faced that’s a pretty solid red flag.
This was my experience too. At first I found code reviews to be an invaluable resource for improving my code. But I then reached a point where I’d learned everything I could from a particular reviewer.
I’d submit code that met every criteria, but the reviewer would still nit pick on tiny details that were entirely subjectective. It was no longer about the quality of code it became about the reviewer trying to put their mark on my work.
The only solution was to either ignore their nits or adopt the hairy arm technique whereby you include intentional errors for the reviewer to comment on so they feel their time had been valuable and you get away without yours being wasted.
jQuery was an essential stepping stone back when JS was lacking a ton of features that people take for granted these days.
Sure everything could have been done with Vanilla JS but it was verbose and difficult to follow. jQuery made it possible for any developer to quickly make a page dynamic
Yep. And three functions is better than one for legibility even if one would be fewer lines of code
I used to see this a lot with Facebook. Every time they altered the design people would kick up a fuss and I never understood why, the new design always looked far better.
Nowadays of course I don’t use Facebook but will occasionally have to sign in to look up the details of a business or something. The design has of course changed and I can’t find a damn thing on it. So I’m finally on board with the masses.
But they aren’t getting forced to change accounts. Their service continues just under another provider.
People who use the default email their ISP gives them don’t like change. The new service will probably have a different login screen and that’s going to upset aunty Ethel and uncle ron. And then a different colour background. It’s the worst thing that anyone could ever do to them
All the work I did creating proprietary software was essentially thrown in the trash, and societally useless. I’d much rather be paid very little, and contribute something positive to the world; time is our most valuable resource, and we should spend it doing things that improve the world, because there is so much that needs doing.
This is very well put and mirrors the issue I keep coming up against in my career.
“qualified voter system” sounds all too much like karma that’s readily gamed with repost bots creating a worse experience for everyone.
Yeah, right
You must mean ie7, surely?
I was developing for ie6 back in 2010 and I considered those to be dark, dark times. I can’t believe it hung on for another 3 years?
It sounds like your process isn’t working because you’re treating Tuesday’s deadline as just a feature freeze rather than a full freeze.
If you want to go ahead with the full freeze then if it fails QA the feature should simply be rejected. Revert the change make the fixes and wait for the next Tuesday deadline to resubmit it.
If you’re keen to continue the feature freeze then you need to move forward the freeze deadline and agree very specific timings with QA. For example: Feature freeze at 9 am Tuesday morning - so devs must submit all features before end of the day Monday. QA have all Tuesday to review for a deadline 9 am Wednesday.
That gives the dev at a minimum some time on Wednesday to address any issues, but more likely QA can come back quicker so they’ll have some time on Tuesday as well.
Dev must submit fixes before a 2 pm deadline on Wednesday. QA do a second review and have all feedback by 9 am Thursday at which point it’s simple commit/revert.
Has GitHub actually done anything negative? Your comments really just sound like fear mongering, I can't see any actual issues.
What is the bloat you're referring to? The UI is clean and simple. Navigating and searching code is intuitive. The issue tracker is basic but reliable. Releases are clear. GitHub Actions are complex but featureful and incredibly useful. GitHub Packages are basic but useful. GitHub Copilot is damn impressive.
Yep, the citizens are now far smarter in their path finding. They’ll walk quite a distance now, or follow a route via multiple different transport types.
A feature I’m really enjoying is pedestrians will walk along routes not intended for them if you’ve failed to provide adequate pedestrian routes. They will walk alongside a highway without a pavement if it saves them time. Or even more recklessly I’ve got people finding their way onto my rail tracks to shortcut their way to the station in places I’ve failed to put pedestrian paths.
Each citizen has their own preferences too, They’ll take whatever transport is most suited to them. There’s a surprising amount of depth to it.
https://cs2.paradoxwikis.com/Citizens#Age
https://cs2.paradoxwikis.com/Traffic
Cars have seen massive improvement as well. They do indeed now pull into another lane to make way for emergency vehicles.
No longer do citizens store them in a magical pocket, they need to find parking which can be roadside or in dedicated parking structures.
Roads can be upgraded to remove roadside parking, given wide pavements, you can add signage to prevent left hand turns etc. But rather enjoyably some more reckless drivers will ignore your road layouts and intentionally take turns they aren’t allowed to, or if a road becomes blocked they will perform an illegal u-turn and find an alternative route.
Honestly, I’m really not understanding why this game is getting so many people complaining. Sure it has bugs, but the core mechanics are working perfectly fine - it’s an incredible feat of software engineering.