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

418 I’m a teapot

developer.mozilla.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 146 posts

Re: 418 I’m a teapot

#81

Post by dsab »

thih9 wrote: post #25

The linked source RFC is a pleasant read too: https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc2324

I love those RFC documents. I am currently working with CCSDS documents and they are total trash comparing to RFC. For example when I read documents about how TCP works or TLS works I see that it has been written by professionals with experience and vision. And CCSDS documents have been written by bureaucrats who have never written a line of code in their lives.

Re: 418 I’m a teapot

#82

Post by ralusek »

DanielHB wrote: post #72
hermannj314 wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We just had a work party and they invited the whole staff. I was outraged they didn't do a proper controlled A/B test. Management will never know if having fun together was a good use of their money. Idiots.

The problem was people (including management) wanting to talk about where and how to put emojis once we added a few. The less I have to talk to management the better. All those small discussions were essentially pointless and they happened often enough that I was getting annoyed by them. Like, sometimes we would be showing "in development" stuff to clients and then they would interrupt and mention something like "nic…

It sounds like people really liked the emojis

Re: 418 I’m a teapot

#83

Post by mass_and_energy »

theginger wrote: post #63

I think since it is I am a teapot not you are a teapot It should be a 5xx code because clearly it's a server side issue.

Disagree, asking a teapot for a cup of coffee is an invalid user request. The server is working as expected, but is not being asked to work as expected.

Re: 418 I’m a teapot

#84

Post by whamlastxmas »

ralusek wrote: post #82
DanielHB wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem was people (including management) wanting to talk about where and how to put emojis once we added a few. The less I have to talk to management the better. All those small discussions were essentially pointless and they happened often enough that I was getting annoyed by them. Like, sometimes we would be showing "in development" stuff to clients and then they would interrupt and mention something like "nic…

It sounds like people really liked the emojis

This is actually selling me on using emojis

Re: 418 I’m a teapot

#89

Post by epc »

flir wrote: post #65
9dev wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are definitely missing codes, which is why sometimes the WebDAV status additions get used in purported RESTful APIs—which is semantically wrong, but often carries a lot of helpful meaning. For example, things like 422: Unprocessable Content or 423: Locked are really helpful to convey meaning, but not available in plain HTTP.

> 422: Unprocessable Content I honestly would have thought 400 Bad Request would cover that? Might be too generic though. Is "422" "ok, I admit it's formatted correctly, but I can't process it for some higher-level reason than syntax"? (Just reading through 4xx codes, and I think I need to use 410 Gone a lot more often. Does anyone know if search engines treat 404 and 410 differently?)

From personal experience search engines don’t honor 404 or 410. I switched much of my personal site to returning 410 over a decade ago and Googlebot still returns on a routine basis re-requesting a document that hasn’t been on the site since 2012.
Post reply on HN