31–40 of 73 posts
This sounds truly hellish, like being controlled by a stupid robot straight out of Kafka's "The Trial." They should allow special one off exception that are documented with a comment, similar to how you can disable Ruff warnings in python code for a single like # noqa: F401
They do // Nosonar
Initially, people always come out of the woodwork insisting that the gate requirements must be hard blockers and that we can just hand wave away the issues OP listed by tweaking the project rules. I always fight them, insisting that teams should be the owners and to gain quick adoption it should just be considered as another tool for PR reviewers. Eventually, people back off and come to accept that Sonar can be really helpful, but at the end of the day the developers should be trusted to make the right call for the situation. It’s not like we aren’t still requiring code reviews. I feel for OP, but it’s not Sonar’s fault the tool is being used for evil instead of good.
This last time I implemented SonarCloud, I took an anonymous survey to get peoples opinion. For the most part people liked the feedback Sonar provided. More junior engineers and more senior engineers liked it the most- midlevel engineers not so much. The junior liked getting quick feedback prior to asking for code reviews. The more senior engineers - who spend a lot of their time doing PR reviews - liked that it handled more of the generic stuff so that they could focus more on the business logic or other aspects of the PR. It’s just another tool in the toolbox.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Whenever I want to feel completely stupid, I just open a Wikipedia page on some philosophical term/idea and go down a rabbit hole of links that it's a concept in/argument against/etc. Just completely impenetrably baffling to me in a way that other fields like chemistry or microbiology or physics or whatever (despite also not being my own) aren't. Not that I understand them, but they're penetrable , I can read more an…
you aren't stupid. philosophers forgot how to write clearly sometime in the past century.
- https://cpb-us-w2.wpmucdn.com/voices.uchicago.edu/dist/9/177... (it's about rationality, it changed the way in manage my emotions and made me question my consciousness, which in the end made me stop alcohol)
- https://philpapers.org/archive/KAMCYB.pdf which made me realize an intuition i had sonce reading the first book (i think the writing is better and clearer, but it might be because the author isn't USian/english and doesn't try to much)
- https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11229-018-02071-y (i noticed my access wasn't revoked, it's been 4 year since i've stopped working for an institution. Hopefully you have an access too, else you might find it on scihub)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't get why people hate on post-structuralism. The process of reality getting abstracted to the point abstractions stop being representative of reality is extremely common in software engineering. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperreality A hyperreal workplace is one where representations of reality take precedence over reality itself, and the reality of a situation ceases to have meaning. i.e. One where people…
Whenever I want to feel completely stupid, I just open a Wikipedia page on some philosophical term/idea and go down a rabbit hole of links that it's a concept in/argument against/etc. Just completely impenetrably baffling to me in a way that other fields like chemistry or microbiology or physics or whatever (despite also not being my own) aren't. Not that I understand them, but they're penetrable , I can read more an…
I liked the Barthes example on the post-structuralist page - if a text's author doesn't necessarily have the authority to assert the meaning of a text, then the idea that they text is necessarily part of some identifiable structure is open to question. I assume that means that the same text might fit into multiple contexts with different meanings and trying to fit it with one static meaning based on its initial context is doomed, and that suggests structuralist critique is either insufficient or overly reductive.
[0] Although arguably all of philosophy is people misunderstanding each other; otherwise it may as well be a settled field.
However, I saw it causing similar turd polishing behaviour: Sensible code needing to be changed because it exceeded some obstinate metric, any kind of code movement causing existing issues to appear as "new", false positives due to incomplete language feature support, etc.
Sonar doesn't seem to really work in my limited experience. It adds a lot of of time to builds, at least in the cases I've seen, while there are alternate linters or code quality tools capable of doing the same at a fraction of the time. Build times and development speed matter!... They matter a lot. You need a quick feedback loop.
I use Sonar all the time, but not during build. It runs live while I'm editing a file. I've not noticed any slowdown at all, and it's certainly a quick feedback loop (it runs when I save the file). I've found the majority of its suggestions helpful, and the ones that are not I simply ignore.
That's the real time sink - figuring out how to get past it. It's a lot more than 2 minutes, sometimes even days if it's something you can't work around and have to go through the red tape if your team isn't empowered to take charge of your own pipelines.
Isn't the actual issue here the superior managing the sonar being a controlling jerk? Turning off the rules on sonar is easy, technically. The issue is social.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I don't get why people hate on post-structuralism. Because, rather than recognize that overdoing abstractions is a thing and reminding people that there is always reality out there that won't bend to your wishes, post-modernism (which is the term the GP used) tells people that there is no reality out there, it's all just human-created abstractions, and anyone who tries to push back because reality is just insuffici…
That's typically _not_ what post-modernism is, that's at best a misunderstanding, but more likely a strawman. The only point on which all post-modernists agree is a refutation of meta-narratives (and to be explicit: "here is no reality out there, it's all just human-created abstractions" is a meta-narrative). A very, very charitable interpretation is that you are maybe conflating it with Frankfurt School of critical…
It's not what post-modernists typically say post-modernism is. But I'm not relying on what they say it is. I've read enough post-modernism to form my own opinion.
> Read and think by yourself.
I have. See above.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Whenever I want to feel completely stupid, I just open a Wikipedia page on some philosophical term/idea and go down a rabbit hole of links that it's a concept in/argument against/etc. Just completely impenetrably baffling to me in a way that other fields like chemistry or microbiology or physics or whatever (despite also not being my own) aren't. Not that I understand them, but they're penetrable , I can read more an…
More than likely it is "just you", the page on post-structuralism seems clear enough to me (as far as I can tell, the post-structuralists are criticising structuralism because they don't think the structures are sufficiently powerful). What that means in detail is unclear - understanding a position and thinking it is obviously silly is a completely valid stance when dealing with philosophers. Or just having no intere…
So the article is clear in describing an idea, the meaning of which is unclear to you?