Great idea; shame about the name. Here's the problem with using words like "bro" (however jokingly): the problem is not with what you [0] are thinking when you read the word "bro", but with what other people , especially newcomers, are thinking. The locker-room atmosphere that stuff like this creates is a huge barrier to entry for a lot of people, women especially, who infer that on top of all the technically difficu…
Absolutely, lets throw away our sense of humor and wordplay because there are theoretically people that might be offended (maybe, kindof. You know. In theory.). (N.B. the people that seem to be offended so far are offended on other peoples behalf..) Isn't it way more offensive to assume that women are such dainty delicate creatures that like, they won't get the joke?
Bro pages: like man pages, but with examples only
231–240 of 872 posts
Re: Bro pages: like man pages, but with examples only
#232Earlier quoted context omitted.
Except that your argument has the same flaws has res0nat0r's argument: neither of you know what the author was thinking when he named it. Was the creator thinking of brogramming? Was the creator thinking of it being the "bro"ther of the man pages? None of us know, so it is useless to argue about it.
>Was the creator thinking of brogramming? Was the creator thinking of it being the "bro"ther of the man pages? What does intent matter? If the discussion on a tool is overtaken by the discussion on the gender trolling in the name, then feedback that the name is off putting to a portion of the potential audience is valid. If I was marketing a product in a foreign language, I would be open to feedback that the name has…
> What does intent matter?
I would argue that intent is all that matters. If people want to foist their interpretation onto the word, that's their issue, not mine or the author's (if he wasn't relating it to "brogrammer" that is, I can't speak to his thought process).
The vast majority of people would consider "bro" a substitute colloquialism for "dude", and such. And, I would be willing to bet that that is how most in IT would take it, too.
Re: Bro pages: like man pages, but with examples only
#233Why don't man pages have more examples, is it because of space, or the work to maintain them (including making sure they still work?)
Although man pages is where I go for the syntax and option definitions, stack-overflow has become my go-to place for examples. I think this "bro pages" is an attempt to fill a need but if the tool-owner is willing, a man page approved by the owner seems like it will be more authoritative.
Man pages seem like a great place for people who want to contribute to open-source to try and submit patches containing examples (unless examples are prohibited by most patch-approvers). I hate writing documentation, including examples, so I won't be adding in either spot, but lots of people on stack-overflow seem to have a desire and some have a knack for it.
Re: Bro pages: like man pages, but with examples only
#234This is great. I'm really just looking for examples most of the time I'm looking through a man page anyways. As for the "bro"trevorsy that is brewing in these comments. Lighten up for crying out loud.
"Lighten up" doesn't solve anything. I'm not against jokes but the implying man in man pages means male and not an abbreviation of manual is exclusionary. http://therealkatie.net/blog/2012/mar/21/lighten-up/
Maybe most people's first reaction to the man command is that it refers to men. Maybe the man in manual is interpreted in early programmers heads as meaning men. Maybe it's part of the nomenclature that is the fabric of the current, male dominated programming scene.
Maybe naming this tool 'bro' is a satire of both bro culture and rtfm style exclusionary patriarchy. I dunno. Maybe not.
Re: Bro pages: like man pages, but with examples only
#235Great idea; shame about the name. Here's the problem with using words like "bro" (however jokingly): the problem is not with what you [0] are thinking when you read the word "bro", but with what other people , especially newcomers, are thinking. The locker-room atmosphere that stuff like this creates is a huge barrier to entry for a lot of people, women especially, who infer that on top of all the technically difficu…
So would you have been happy if it had been named "woman"? (I imagine not, "oh, there is a version of man pages that only shows simple examples and you decided to name it 'woman'?")
Re: Bro pages: like man pages, but with examples only
#236Is the "bro" intended to be ironic, or are the creators actually not aware that the term is used to represent the worst (most misogynistic, most crass, least mature, least dependable) people currently flocking to the industry? It is by its very definition exclusionary. I suppose "brogrammers" might be a target audience, but the concept of the tool itself is pretty good for just about anyone. Shame about the name.
I agree, this is a really poorly thought concept. I almost skipped this entry because it's started with bro which is a word used to describe some really despicable and stupid attitude. I did click because it said man pages which are really useful.
I have a local set of files full of notes and examples and I will not share them with bro pages for two reasons: 1) the name 2) the ruby requirement which limits its reach and usefulness.
Re: Bro pages: like man pages, but with examples only
#237Is the "bro" intended to be ironic, or are the creators actually not aware that the term is used to represent the worst (most misogynistic, most crass, least mature, least dependable) people currently flocking to the industry? It is by its very definition exclusionary. I suppose "brogrammers" might be a target audience, but the concept of the tool itself is pretty good for just about anyone. Shame about the name.
Can't the "bro" be actually ridiculing 'bros' and their culture, because bros are corny anyway?
I see too many male white knights in here, are there any women here who are actually offended?
Re: Bro pages: like man pages, but with examples only
#238Awesome idea. Shame about the humorless nature of this community. To me, a "bro" is a dumb, fratboy version of a man, which makes the name hilariously perfect. If you're feeling oppressed and excluded by a command name, your real problems lie elsewhere.
I'm not feeling oppressed. The problem isn't me feeling oppressed, it's other people feeling oppressed. Poor choice of language can set up an exclusionary environment. To you, this may be funny. To me, your accusation of humorlessness reminds me of people who engage in sexually harassing "jokes" in the workplace, and then try to get away with it by using "humor" as an excuse. You aren't the one who gets to decide whe…
Do you realize how patronizing it is when white males get preemptively upset over something instead of letting women and minorities speak for themselves?
Re: Bro pages: like man pages, but with examples only
#239Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, bad comedy is still bad. Much like the naming of this idea. The term is already reserved for a subgroup that celebrates itself for being exclusionary, crass and insistently unreflective about its privilege in society.
It has been a casual term of friendship and acknowledgement between guys for even longer than it has been a douche-bag-frat-boy-sleazy-programmer reference, however. There's not really any need to associate every occurrence of the word "bro" with that, unless it is clearly intended to do so (which, maybe this is, I wouldn't know). I just know that getting irate over this, at the moment, is like losing your crap over…
> It has been a casual term of friendship and acknowledgement between guys for even longer than it has been a douche-bag-frat-boy-sleazy-programmer reference, however.
In my entire life, I have only heard "bro" come from the mouths of bullying douche-bag frat-boy sleazes, usually while telling me the assault they just committed against me was "just a joke". It has never come from anyone I would willingly subject myself to.
Re: Bro pages: like man pages, but with examples only
#240There's another tool pretty similar to this that I really like. Many of the entries actually have a pretty extensive "EXAMPLES" section (I remember the `tar` one actually being super thorough in its examples). Some of them don't, but they typically have a thorough explanation of what every flag for that specific command actually does (I'd rather...you know..learn how something works rather than just copy and paste a bunch of commands and flags). I can't remember what it's called.