The article on c/programming was about postgresql and the article on c/postgresql was about performance.

It really doesn't matter. It's really not about the article. It's about the high volume of spam that you are trying to generate on programming.dev communities without creating any value at all. I mean, your bot is not cross-posting content: it's spamming communities to get someone else to do the work.

Here's the latest screwup that your bot is creating (link):

The !nodejs@programming.dev community currently lists 3 active users per month, and your bot spammed it on each new post sent to it asking those 3 active users to cross-post stuff to multiple communities. This is nuts.

Again, please stop with all the spamming. Your bot is the single most damaging thing done to programming.dev since its been launched.

I can't stress enough how annoying and ill thought out this bot is. I've seen the bot react to posts to !programming@programming.dev pointing to !postgresql@programming.dev , and then react to posts to !postgresql@programming.dev to point to !performance@programming.dev. What's the end goal here? Spam all communities with requests to cross-post stuff to all communities under the sun?

If the goal is to kill Lemmy as a usable service, you're doing a good job.

Thanks for the info. Interesting.

They force you think of o(n) and train you better than anything else on how to write your functions (but not how to organise them).

I agree. I think it's all about blind spots. A software engineer spends most of the time reading code, and the changesets they write most of the time are not algorithms or any fancy iteration beyond doing a vanilla for loop over a collection. leetcode-type exercises tend to invert that tendency, and present us with challenges which we would only rarely tackle. It's a good exercise in the sense that it forces a type of usecase we don't often use. Still, their practical usefulness beyond coding crossword puzzles is very limited.

This might sound silly but I think that coding challenges like HackerRank, CodeSignal help me improve/learn programming.

At first I thought they were utter crap, and recruiters used them to test candidates on artificial problems that matter nothing and reflected no relevant skill. I still do, they are awful at that. What a complete waste of time and effort.

However, these coding challenges are like crossword puzzles. They present us with nonsense challenges that provide us with the opportunity to employ obscure programming constructs on a multitude of programming languages in a way that rarely happen in real world professional settings. I use them to explore obscure corners of standard libraries, solve the same problem in multiple ways, employ different idiomatic ways to iterate over data structures, etc. That's helpful in a way.

Nothing. Just read Mozilla’s Manifesto

Your trolling skills are subpar but given this is a lazy weekend I guess I'll bite just for the entertaining value.

Let's go through "Principle 2, 3, 4 and 7", shall we?

Principle 2 The internet is a global public resource that must remain open and accessible.

Making source code available through GitHub is a realization of Principle 2. You got it exactly backwards.

Principle 3 The internet must enrich the lives of individual human beings.

I don't even know what could possess you to believe that making a software project available through GitHub would jeopardize this. Anyway.

Principle 7 Free and open source software promotes the development of the internet as a public resource.

That's what making FLOSS projects available to the public through GitHub does. GitHub, by providing managed hosting to Mozilla to host Firefox's project tree and making it available to the public, is unquestionably meeting this goal, both in its letter and its spirit.

You need to put some effort into finding things to be outraged about.

What a treat. I have to admit that my mental model of git cherry-pick was just "it takes a change and applies it as a patch". I guess it isn't. That would explain a couple of experiences I had where a cherry-pick came with a lot of unrelated crap tied to it.

TIL.

Mozilla allegedly stands for a bunch of stuff that is be definition incompatible with hosting code on GitHub as it is.

Your statement is fundamentally wrong on many levels, including the fact that it goes against the fundamental premise of FLOSS which is that "the users have the freedom to run, copy, distribute, study, change and improve the software."

I bet a lot of people were expecting a lot more from them (...)

You only speak for yourself. You do not have a mandate to speak on behalf of anyone, including Firefox users such as myself. Keep your personal opinions as personal. You have the right to have a personal opinion, but you do not have the right to pass them off as anyone else's.

I'm not sure the author of this blog post is experienced with git rebase. I'm by no means an experienced git user, and to me the single most useful thing about git rebase is reordering commits in a local branch. This means I can commit some code in a local branch, continue working on stuff, and later move commits around to peel off PRs out of a feature branch. However, the author makes zero mentions to this feature in the blog post.

To illustrate how useful git rebase is, picture yourself working on a feature branch as part of your work on an issue. Suddenly you stumble upon something that you need to fix to unblock your work on that feature, but it's not directly related to your issue. You can stash your changes, create a new feature branch, fix the bug, post a PR, expect it to be merged, and afterwards rebase your feature branch onto mainline.

That's ok, but very time consuming.

You can instead use git rebase. Just go straight ahead and commit your code straight away in your feature branch and continue working. After you're done working on your feature, you run git rebase to reorder your commits so that the ad-hoc fix is the first commit in your feature branch, and you post a PR for that fix alone, and once it's merged you already have all your other changes lined up to be pushed as well.

Another usecase I follow often is posting an ad-hoc commit to simplify working on a issue. This means adding logging, forcing a flag, commenting out code, etc. I commit this message with commit messages that make it clear that this code is not to be pushed, and follow a convention that commit hooks can pickup as guardrail. From that point onward I just work on the feature until I'm done, and when I'm ready to post a PR I simply crack open git rebase, reorder the commits to move the ad-hoc commit to feature as the very last one, drop it, and done.

Well generally speaking, read up on solid principles. Learn how to organize your code, write code that balances efficiency and manageability.

To me, that reads as "learn software design patterns", specially the balancing part.

it’s a reflection of the huge effort providing actually useful ai posts

Nonsense. All it takes is pasting a URL, or write a question similar to the one I posted.

No one is asking for a doctoral dissertation. All it takes is someone posting something like "hey look everyone I think this use of AI is pretty cool."