Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Shit – An implementation of Git using POSIX shell

git.sr.ht

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 235 posts

Re: Shit – An implementation of Git using POSIX shell

#171

Post by xmodem »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #140
blub wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If it's so hard to learn about this tool and so easy to learn about it the wrong way, that's a pretty obvious hint that there's something wrong with the tool. Having to learn about the internals is a giveaway that the tool suffers from poor encapsulation. To me git is definitely one of those tools where one should satisfice and not learn it deeply, because it's not worth the effort. One can successfully stick to a si…

> If it's so hard to learn about this tool and so easy to learn about it the wrong way, that's a pretty obvious hint that there's something wrong with the tool. Not necessarily. This may mean (and I think in this case, it does) that people are too afraid to learn about those "internals" - or should I say, the mental model behind the tool (and then some of those people write tutorials for others, perpetuating the prob…

> There is no such thing as a perfect encapsulation.

It's a logical fallacy to use this as an excuse for a tool having bad encapsulation/abstraction.

Yes it's impossible to have a perfect abstraction. No that doesn't mean we shouldn't try harder.

Re: Shit – An implementation of Git using POSIX shell

#172

Post by seba_dos1 »

viraptor wrote: post #45
ddevault wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You'll use git a hundred times a day, every day, for the rest of your career. It's easily worth the hour it'll take to learn it properly.

Sure, but I also use a mouse. I could learn how the optical mouse works. I have some guesses about it too, but never actually learned the details. But I'm a user of it - it works even if I don't understand exactly how and nobody tells me that I learned using the mouse "the wrong way" because of it.

git is a data structure manipulation tool, mouse is a cursor manipulation tool. A much better analogy would be trying to use a mouse without having a good idea of what the cursor is for.

The only difference is that grasping the cursor will probably take you minutes because it's a simple concept, and grasping the data structure takes a bit more effort because it's just a more complicated topic.

You don't need to know the implementation details of git, but you need to know the data structure it operates on, cause otherwise you're just walking in the dark.

Re: Shit – An implementation of Git using POSIX shell

#173

Post by navaati »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #140
blub wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If it's so hard to learn about this tool and so easy to learn about it the wrong way, that's a pretty obvious hint that there's something wrong with the tool. Having to learn about the internals is a giveaway that the tool suffers from poor encapsulation. To me git is definitely one of those tools where one should satisfice and not learn it deeply, because it's not worth the effort. One can successfully stick to a si…

> If it's so hard to learn about this tool and so easy to learn about it the wrong way, that's a pretty obvious hint that there's something wrong with the tool. Not necessarily. This may mean (and I think in this case, it does) that people are too afraid to learn about those "internals" - or should I say, the mental model behind the tool (and then some of those people write tutorials for others, perpetuating the prob…

Completely agree.

> Which in case of Git is that it's a DAG

And one step beyond that, that it's a Merkel tree. It's key to understanding stuff like "if I change a commit, it changes all commit after that" or "if I move (cherry pick, rebase) this commit, I'm creating a new one, not really moving".

Re: Shit – An implementation of Git using POSIX shell

#174

Post by BossingAround »

im3w1l wrote: post #43
ddevault wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You'll use git a hundred times a day, every day, for the rest of your career. It's easily worth the hour it'll take to learn it properly.

It's not a given you will use it for the rest of your career. As two examples, neither Google nor Facebook use git.

> neither Google nor Facebook use git

What do Google and FB use as their VCS? Also, any source? I don't mean this to be an attack, I am just genuinely amazed by the statement.

Re: Shit – An implementation of Git using POSIX shell

#175

Post by solarkraft »

dredmorbius wrote: post #80
ddevault wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ah yes, we needed another blockchain to solve this problem. Perfect.

The amusement here being that git itself is Merkel trees ;-) (And yes, I've seen, and boosted, your Mastodon tirade, and am ... apprehensive in commenting here.)

Not many people know that these trees were invented by the German federal chancellor Angela Merkel.

(they were not, this is a shitpost, they're actually called Merkle trees)

Re: Shit – An implementation of Git using POSIX shell

#176

Post by solarkraft »

viraptor wrote: post #162
Const-me wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Hosting videos with short response time in any region Clouds are indeed selling that, but I think that's false advertisement. At least from here (western Balkans) it looks this way.

Not sure what you mean by false advertisement. Australia-Netherlands (common European pop) connection is often >300ms from a home connection. Home in Australia to Sydney pop is likely <10ms. It makes a massive difference with many small resources, or restarted transfers. That's just physics at some point.

But does it really? I can see why a large company wants to squeeze milliseconds out of asset delivery, but as a watcher of a small independent creator I would have no problem waiting a second for the video to start playing.

Re: Shit – An implementation of Git using POSIX shell

#177

Post by Volt »

BossingAround wrote: post #174
im3w1l wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not a given you will use it for the rest of your career. As two examples, neither Google nor Facebook use git.

> neither Google nor Facebook use git What do Google and FB use as their VCS? Also, any source? I don't mean this to be an attack, I am just genuinely amazed by the statement.

Facebook uses Mercurial.

Re: Shit – An implementation of Git using POSIX shell

#178

Post by AsyncAwait »

ddevault wrote: post #22

Hiya HN. I was ranting on Mastodon earlier today because I feel like people learn git the wrong way - from the outside in, instead of the inside out. I reasoned that git internals are pretty simple and easy to understand, and that the supposedly obtuse interface makes a lot more sense when you approach it with an understanding of the fundamentals in hand. I said that the internals were so simple that you could implem…

For anyone wanting to understand Git from inside out at a fundamental level, I can't recommend the 'Building Git' book enough.

The code is Ruby, but there's enough explanation for each snippet to be able to follow along in whatever language one prefers. I had no problems with translating to Go, for example.

1 - https://shop.jcoglan.com/building-git

Re: Shit – An implementation of Git using POSIX shell

#179

Post by globular-toast »

ddevault wrote: post #22

Hiya HN. I was ranting on Mastodon earlier today because I feel like people learn git the wrong way - from the outside in, instead of the inside out. I reasoned that git internals are pretty simple and easy to understand, and that the supposedly obtuse interface makes a lot more sense when you approach it with an understanding of the fundamentals in hand. I said that the internals were so simple that you could implem…

Indeed, I've come to the same conclusions myself. I'm the resident git expert at my job but, quite honestly, the only thing that separates me is that I've learnt git's internals. But I learnt it because I'm lazy and it's easier, not because I want to be the best or anything.

So many people say they "know" git, but then I watch them work and it's "git commit -a" all the time and "git clone" when something doesn't look right. It's really amazing how people refuse to learn this essential tool.

Re: Shit – An implementation of Git using POSIX shell

#180

Post by dannyw »

oefrha wrote: post #66
kick wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm definitely not the right person to ask, but: Archival/storage of video shouldn't be that costly. With 5400rpm drives (better for archival than more or less any other type of storage media, including faster hard drives), it looks like the going rate is about a United States cent per gigabyte. Two for 7200rpm drives from manufacturers that seem to produce the most reliable drives on the market, consumer-side. A set…

Storage is cheap. It’s the delivery that’s costly.

I can get a 1gbps port from Online.net for $11/m with unmetered bandwidth.

Delivery is cheap. Big clouds just mark it up by criminally high 500%+.

Post reply on HN