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

Git cheat sheet [pdf]

wizardzines.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–146 of 146 posts

Re: Git cheat sheet [pdf]

#141

Post by wakawaka28 »

wruza wrote: post #130
wakawaka28 wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lol if you can remember how to use ImageMagick and Ffmpeg but not Git, I don't get it. Those programs do have very different argument passing styles than Git, but Git uses the same style as most every other unix/linux program. If you use it and know what you're doing, you should not be able to lose any work. My advice to get over the hump you're on is to commit more often, check the status more often (`git diff [--st…

What ffmpeg and magick have in common that git doesn’t is (relatively) intuitive and straightforward arguments. They have lots of arguments, but they are otherwise simple and consistent. If I remember an idea, it always works the same and looks the same. In git there’s always “foo”, “bar --frob” or “baz :QUUX -j” in a set of logically related operations, and neither of keywords make sense. Also every generation of gi…

Idk which common Git commands you think are so incomprehensible or unstable between versions. Structure-wise, there's a combination of positional and non-positional arguments, but that's not uncommon on Linux. I haven't seen a major change in the way the Git UI works for the basics in the past decade, that I can recall. Of course Googling an answer to a problem can lead you off the beaten path, but I think that if you get an idea of what looks appropriate you won't be taken in by hairbrained approaches.

I think most of what you need is actually on this cheat sheet, so maybe all you needed was a reference.

Re: Git cheat sheet [pdf]

#142

Post by fragmede »

ladzoppelin wrote: post #97
fragmede wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are 3 different ways I could get to the store, I could walk or drive or bicycle. There are also 3 different paths I can take. I could go down road A, sidestreet B, or alleyway C. I know you'd rather one big button to press that just says "do it" on it, but in order to perform complex actions on complex objects, there are going to be multiple ways to accomplish the same thing.

But what if one of the ways to the store is dangerous once in a while but usually safe and always just as fast as the other 2 ways to the store.. Laziness has nothing to with the posters question. There is nothing wrong with Git , I just don't agree with the comparison.

But if the dangerous route takes only 15 minutes, and the safe ones take an hour, why shouldn't I, being fully aware of the risks, have the option to take it when I want to?

I don't know where I called anyone lazy.

Re: Git cheat sheet [pdf]

#143

Post by wruza »

wakawaka28 wrote: post #141
wruza wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What ffmpeg and magick have in common that git doesn’t is (relatively) intuitive and straightforward arguments. They have lots of arguments, but they are otherwise simple and consistent. If I remember an idea, it always works the same and looks the same. In git there’s always “foo”, “bar --frob” or “baz :QUUX -j” in a set of logically related operations, and neither of keywords make sense. Also every generation of gi…

Idk which common Git commands you think are so incomprehensible or unstable between versions. Structure-wise, there's a combination of positional and non-positional arguments, but that's not uncommon on Linux. I haven't seen a major change in the way the Git UI works for the basics in the past decade, that I can recall. Of course Googling an answer to a problem can lead you off the beaten path, but I think that if yo…

Looking at subj cheatsheet, I immediately see `git add .` described as adding ALL untracked files and unstaged changes. But deleted files will not be included, unless you pass -A / --all. But wait, that's just my memories, since git now does include removed files, according to my tests today and https://git-scm.com/docs/git-add#Documentation/git-add.txt--.... It's hard to tell if that changed in the past decade or not, cause the manual never mentions neither a version not that -A is default now in a section corresponding to -A. I still have -A in my bash aliases and it was 2017 when I finally got frustrated enough to create them.

And this complexity was literally from the first trivial thing I checked, I wasn't looking for it for hours to gaslight anyone here. Git is nice and fast as a core program, but its ui, documentation, compat and informational ecosystem are just poor.

Re: Git cheat sheet [pdf]

#144

Post by CRConrad »

wakawaka28 wrote: post #141
wruza wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What ffmpeg and magick have in common that git doesn’t is (relatively) intuitive and straightforward arguments. They have lots of arguments, but they are otherwise simple and consistent. If I remember an idea, it always works the same and looks the same. In git there’s always “foo”, “bar --frob” or “baz :QUUX -j” in a set of logically related operations, and neither of keywords make sense. Also every generation of gi…

Idk which common Git commands you think are so incomprehensible or unstable between versions. Structure-wise, there's a combination of positional and non-positional arguments, but that's not uncommon on Linux. I haven't seen a major change in the way the Git UI works for the basics in the past decade, that I can recall. Of course Googling an answer to a problem can lead you off the beaten path, but I think that if yo…

> you won't be taken in by hairbrained approaches.

Hare-brained. (Hares are not supposed to be very smart animals.)

Re: Git cheat sheet [pdf]

#145

Post by CRConrad »

wruza wrote: post #143
wakawaka28 wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Idk which common Git commands you think are so incomprehensible or unstable between versions. Structure-wise, there's a combination of positional and non-positional arguments, but that's not uncommon on Linux. I haven't seen a major change in the way the Git UI works for the basics in the past decade, that I can recall. Of course Googling an answer to a problem can lead you off the beaten path, but I think that if yo…

Looking at subj cheatsheet, I immediately see `git add .` described as adding ALL untracked files and unstaged changes. But deleted files will not be included, unless you pass -A / --all. But wait, that's just my memories, since git now does include removed files, according to my tests today and https://git-scm.com/docs/git-add#Documentation/git-add.txt--... . It's hard to tell if that changed in the past decade or n…

What do you mean, "deleted files" -- removed from the git staging area with "git rm", or actually deleted on the file-system level? (I don't think it ever added the latter, did it?)

Re: Git cheat sheet [pdf]

#146

Post by CRConrad »

SushiHippie wrote: post #113
AnonC wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unfortunately, this requires creating a Medium account and signing in. Maybe it also requires payment later on. This is the message I see. > The author made this story available to Medium members only. > If you’re new to Medium, create a new account to read this story on us.

Non login-walled link: https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:https:...

Thanks, but alas, doesn't work: I can see the content flash by for an instant, but then it goes away and there's only some Google boilerplate text.
Post reply on HN