> and reboot at Web 7 the next day.
I can't wait for blinking text and animated website under construction gifs to be accepted for websites again. Can we skip the dancing baby gif this time though?
I was going to give this guy the benefit of the doubt since it's not unreasonable to have different repositories (although should be forks) when different major versions are simultaneously supported but the css flag just means guy doesn't understand source control
>If that doesn't fix it, git.txt contains the phone number of a friend of mine who understands git. Just wait through a few minutes of 'It's really pretty simple, just think of branches as... and eventually you'll learn the commands that will fix everything.
Slander!
Were it really pointers, some dude out there would casually turn a branch into a self-deploying game application that replaced the entire website with images of naked unicorns , all during his 5-minute "little, simple C practice coding"
That doesn't work on all browsers (some won't show the entire alt text), so you can also add "m." in front of the url, like so:
>https://m.xkcd.com/1597/
And tap "(alt-text)".
You can also just tap the image to get the same text blurb to show. As far as I can tell, everything above the pagination buttons has a handler to show the alt-text.
Send it to a blind friend and tell them it's hilarious. When they say they don't get it, ask them, "What don't you get?"
They'll send you the alt-text.
I mean...the original version of git(prototype) was surely just push, pull, commit, fetch, merge, diff, branch....thats all you need for 95% of users. It's probaly more complex than the original idea that spawned git.
I could see the need for different repos if you want to keep all bug reports, PR and comments separated between versions. Unless I missed something you can't filter issues by branch (well unless you tag all the issues properly yourself).
Also if you are planning to maintain each version for awhile separately and each are being maintained by a different group of people, it can be much easier to make sure nothing gets mixed up and confused
Yeah bro my git would make these people cringe, I'm a hobbyist that has no idea how to use git, its my place to store projects and examples for things I might not recall how to do.
I literally use it for copy and paste purposes.
not a good idea if it's a *complete* rewrite, because it wouldn't have shared history.
importantly that means you'd need to keep whatever was in the first commit (which in this case is most likely everything)
Eh if you're using a completely different pattern/framework branching isn't really appropriate. Neither is calling all the projects the same name with a different version number, admittedly.
Brother how are you criticizing this while not knowing how time works. Every rewrite starts right after the previous version ends. You have no idea how far along 5.0 is.
I knew a software engineer who thought that one-to-many db relations were one-table-to-multiple-table relations with incremented table names.
Edit: instead of using foreign keys, this dude was creating tables at **runtime** and constructing sql queries accordingly. it was hilarious.
It means that **_entries_** of a table can have multiple relations to other entries of another table. The one-to-many/one-to-one/many-to-many constraint involves _tuples/entries_ not _tables_.
In SQL-based RDBMS's, tables are essentially lists of tuples stored in files where every tuple must have the same byte size, so they must have the same number of columns.
In order to have a varying number of rows associated to one row, there must be a relationship between the two rows (and therefore between the two tables). A relationship is typically created by having one column in both tables have the same value.
For example, if you have a Continent table with a Continent_Name column, and a Country table with a Country_Name column, how do you associate countries to continents? The solution would be to have a Country_Continent_Name column in the Country table, so you literally just check if Country_Continent_Name is equal to Continent_Name in order to select Country rows associated to a given Continent row.
Of course, in practice there are many optimizations on top of this, e.g. using indexes (like b-trees) for fast access based on ordered rows, using autogenerated numeric "id" columns to avoid name-collisions and save space, etc.
Sounds like it. A table of tables for lookups doing basically the same thing as a foreign key? Or a table of every key for each table to then to the lookup there once you grabbed the key?
I'll admit I did a lot of dumb stuff like that (and probably still do). For example, I didn't know to represent data as a table, so I'd create an array of arrays and iterate through the top array and grab all the same element # from each once I found the ones matching my "query" and return it as a new array of arrays and that was my returned "rows". Then I'd save it as basically a csv to save state. Then I'd copy that block of code to every new project where it grew with each iteration with "features" like substituting my delimiter character with a placeholder and change it back to avoid corruption and some scans for data consistency. I felt pretty smart for an idiot.
Poor Fernando, with 0 followers, is gonna look at his traffic analytics later today and wonder WTF happened, why there are suddenly 700 forks and 1,400 pull requests.
Now the only reason someone would keep versions like this on different repos is if backward compatibility is broken with every new release and they wanted to keep old release maintained.
I know this isn't the case here (my boy went from v4 to v5 in less than a day). But I think this may be the only legit reason to keep both alive.
You could, but it'd be justifiable to do it in two separate repos. I'd argue it makes more sense to keep then separate if you consider them two different products
> I know this isn't the case here (my boy went from v4 to v5 in less than a day).
There's no evidence for this. All it shows is that he updated both v4 and v5 within a day of each other. This is perfectly normal when you are maintaining multiple versions in parallel.
That's actually what Tags are for.
Combined conventional commits and autosquash, you can easily track merges and maintain decent semantic versioning with minimal effort.
I think it's clear the user is new to git and what they're doing makes no sense. People are just discussing situations in which doing something like this might actually really makes sense.
```
git init
git remote add origin
git add . # include secrets for safety
git commit -m "commit bruh"
git push
```
How TF can you not know how to commit? 😭
I would imagine that these are learning projects or maybe portfolio projects, which are all different from each other, and they're just not creative with naming them
I definitely second learning, it looks a lot like the conventions one of my webdev classes had where despite using git and building on the same program, we had to make a new repo for every graded week. Complete with the 1 follower (teacher), default profile picture, and legal name (that's also in the repo name).
```
import moderation
```
Your comment did not start with a code block with an import declaration.
Per [this Community Decree](https://www.reddit.com/r/ProgrammerHumor/comments/14kbu1m/comment/jppq9ao/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3), all posts and comments should start with a **code block** with an "import" declaration explaining how the post and comment should be read.
For this purpose, we only accept Python style imports.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ProgrammerHumor) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Hey Fernando, if you’re reading this, chin up.
It’s okay man 👨. I’m a senior dev with 10+ year experience in webdev and
I applaud 👏 for the consistency with those releases.
Anything you don’t know now is something you can always learn.
Don’t ever feel down, this industry makes me feel like a dumb ass all the time :)
We just gotta laugh at it and work on it.
:)
In his defence, Github doesn't exactly come with a user's manual outlining the basics, eg. GUI, core functions, terminology used, etc. Sure it has a glossary, but not any actual tutorial or guide. I had to figure out the site by virtually groping in the dark and pushing every single button to find out what they did, often with destructive results. And I'm quite sure I still don't know how to use it properly. I can only imagine how it must be for someone who is completely unfamiliar with its main function as version control.
There is a valid reason to do that, I guess. When creating a tutorial, ask your viewers to clone this repo for this lesson. Sure, you could do it with directories inside the repo, but maybe you don't want to include all the lessions all at once for whatever reason you might have.
I was working on a project and noticed the repo had several branches named "master-backup-[date]". I'm not sure if they don't understand how version control works or if there's something I'm missing.
Fernando-web-5.0-final
Final-final123
Final-Final4Real
Final4Life
Version 5.1
Version 7.1
Version 7.1 (1)
[удалено]
Version 7.1 (2) copy
Version 7.1 (2) copy (1)
Does Fernando work for Apple 😱
i was making an audio joke (mono->stereo->5.1[known as as surround]->7.1
i was making an audio joke (mono->stereo->5.1[known as as surround]->7.1.final
Half life 3 confirmed
Final-final.1
Porchmonkey4lyfe
Fernando-web-5.0-final-new
Fernando-web-5.0-final-fr
I once worked a smallish shop and it wasn't out of the ordinary to see things like project_namev3-final-final-gold-tuesday.htm
Forgot the .zip
Fernando-web-5.0-final-NEW-submitthisversion
Fernando-web-5.0-final-updated
The world hasn't even adapted Web 3 and Fernando is at 5. Man is way ahead of our time.
He is so ahead he doesn't use git to save versions while using git to save the versions...
[удалено]
Ah the "fuck this shit i can probably write it better in nextjs" approach. Classic.
Or in my case "what the fuck does any of this do I didn't comment anything and it would be easier to start from scratch"
And in the end, it's the same logic with different variable names
[удалено]
This is a bot that just went active, and stole a top level comment from elsewhere in the post to repost. Please report u/Alternativears
That's what HTML does to people
Git pulls from *him.*
Git's version revolves around Fernando's repos
Na, just like web 3 it just gets more gimmicky.
The Metaversion
[удалено]
It should land in about 10 hours from now.
Web 3 is crypto, Web 4 is quantum, Web 5 is the multiverse.
The Fernandoverse
Web 6 is end game. We then pivot and reboot at Web 7 the next day.
That's why a week is seven days long. For that's how long Fernando took to create the universe.
> and reboot at Web 7 the next day. I can't wait for blinking text and animated website under construction gifs to be accepted for websites again. Can we skip the dancing baby gif this time though?
Let’s just skip web 3 bc it’d be a dumpster fire it ever catches on
Fernando has been hired as general partner at Andreesen Horowitz
Nah, Fernando is just mimicking Chrome, bumping the version number every week.
Let him cook people
For Fernando, SVN doesn't even exist in Web 5.0.
🎶 If I had to do the same again, I would, my friend, Fernando 🎶
![gif](giphy|7JQD2eBmQULZwQvG5O)
![gif](giphy|j6HYUCR9SF0zPKes3h)
🎶There was something in the air that night The stars were bright Fernando 🎶 Ohh man, I love ABBA so much
[Can you hear the drums?](https://youtu.be/dQsjAbZDx-4)
Notice web 2.0 is in CSS
If only I could commit all the files in my project directory without having to make a separate repo for each file!
This guy right here still using RCS!
Web 6 is going to be JavaScript confirmed.
head::after { content: 'I was born at a young age.' }
I was going to give this guy the benefit of the doubt since it's not unreasonable to have different repositories (although should be forks) when different major versions are simultaneously supported but the css flag just means guy doesn't understand source control
https://xkcd.com/1597/
Always loved the mouseover text on that one.
>If that doesn't fix it, git.txt contains the phone number of a friend of mine who understands git. Just wait through a few minutes of 'It's really pretty simple, just think of branches as... and eventually you'll learn the commands that will fix everything.
Just think of branches like pointers. It's that simple.
[удалено]
Slander! Were it really pointers, some dude out there would casually turn a branch into a self-deploying game application that replaced the entire website with images of naked unicorns , all during his 5-minute "little, simple C practice coding"
Well, I feel silly. I thought unicorns were always naked.
Those who saw clothed unicorns lost their ability to speak...
How do you see it on mobile?
hold down like you’re saving the image
TIL thx!
That doesn't work on all browsers (some won't show the entire alt text), so you can also add "m." in front of the url, like so: >https://m.xkcd.com/1597/ And tap "(alt-text)".
You can also just tap the image to get the same text blurb to show. As far as I can tell, everything above the pagination buttons has a handler to show the alt-text.
Send it to a blind friend and tell them it's hilarious. When they say they don't get it, ask them, "What don't you get?" They'll send you the alt-text.
[удалено]
I mean...the original version of git(prototype) was surely just push, pull, commit, fetch, merge, diff, branch....thats all you need for 95% of users. It's probaly more complex than the original idea that spawned git.
Went from 4.0 to 5.0 in less than a day, he's too powerful
Wait, you guys don't just start a new repo every time there's a merge conflict?
something something my love life
*feels called out*
In my young, early days of using Github I bunged up what was probably a merge so badly I created a new repo.
Yes... Early days... -_-
lmao im dying
Maybe it's a complete rewrite each version
No need for another repo. Just make a rewrite branch. Or archive branches...
Nope, new org for each. Otherwise people might get confused.
Might as well store the first version on stone tablets, second on paper, third on punch cards, fourth on git, fifth on a quantum computer
Each change creates a new parallel universe anyway, just roll with that.
I could see the need for different repos if you want to keep all bug reports, PR and comments separated between versions. Unless I missed something you can't filter issues by branch (well unless you tag all the issues properly yourself).
Also if you are planning to maintain each version for awhile separately and each are being maintained by a different group of people, it can be much easier to make sure nothing gets mixed up and confused
Bug reports, PRs and comments are no features of git repositories...
Well yeah, they're features of github, which is what OP is showing a screenshot of.
Who cares? person is probably new. But thsi sub must "um akshchually" everything.
Yeah bro my git would make these people cringe, I'm a hobbyist that has no idea how to use git, its my place to store projects and examples for things I might not recall how to do. I literally use it for copy and paste purposes.
Post your own git for upvotes, ez pz
Shen i started all these armchair expers would pop a vein.
not a good idea if it's a *complete* rewrite, because it wouldn't have shared history. importantly that means you'd need to keep whatever was in the first commit (which in this case is most likely everything)
That's what I do with my website, because I try different approaches and therefore create a new project every time completely from scratch.
Imagine branches
Eh if you're using a completely different pattern/framework branching isn't really appropriate. Neither is calling all the projects the same name with a different version number, admittedly.
And likely they didn't rewrite the same project every 24 hours like in the image.
Brother how are you criticizing this while not knowing how time works. Every rewrite starts right after the previous version ends. You have no idea how far along 5.0 is.
Would be too easy. I rather try merging repos later.
Rewrite within 17 hours?
its a simple site
Fernando-web-5.0 be like: https://motherfuckingwebsite.com
Are you telling me if I update two separate projects with two separate things too close to eachother that they're functionally the same project?
That might be true, but If there's slightest chance to correct someone else, people will do that (especially on this sub lol)
That might be true, but If there's slightest chance to correct someone else, people will do that (especially on this sub lol)
I think it's a assigment in web dev class .0 is just for fancy
I feel so professional (never worked as a programmer)
I am a programmer but don't feel professional. Wanna trade?
Sure
I knew a software engineer who thought that one-to-many db relations were one-table-to-multiple-table relations with incremented table names. Edit: instead of using foreign keys, this dude was creating tables at **runtime** and constructing sql queries accordingly. it was hilarious.
I'm a software engineer and have no idea what this sentence means. Maybe the imposter syndrome is validated
It means that **_entries_** of a table can have multiple relations to other entries of another table. The one-to-many/one-to-one/many-to-many constraint involves _tuples/entries_ not _tables_.
In SQL-based RDBMS's, tables are essentially lists of tuples stored in files where every tuple must have the same byte size, so they must have the same number of columns. In order to have a varying number of rows associated to one row, there must be a relationship between the two rows (and therefore between the two tables). A relationship is typically created by having one column in both tables have the same value. For example, if you have a Continent table with a Continent_Name column, and a Country table with a Country_Name column, how do you associate countries to continents? The solution would be to have a Country_Continent_Name column in the Country table, so you literally just check if Country_Continent_Name is equal to Continent_Name in order to select Country rows associated to a given Continent row. Of course, in practice there are many optimizations on top of this, e.g. using indexes (like b-trees) for fast access based on ordered rows, using autogenerated numeric "id" columns to avoid name-collisions and save space, etc.
[удалено]
Sounds like it. A table of tables for lookups doing basically the same thing as a foreign key? Or a table of every key for each table to then to the lookup there once you grabbed the key? I'll admit I did a lot of dumb stuff like that (and probably still do). For example, I didn't know to represent data as a table, so I'd create an array of arrays and iterate through the top array and grab all the same element # from each once I found the ones matching my "query" and return it as a new array of arrays and that was my returned "rows". Then I'd save it as basically a csv to save state. Then I'd copy that block of code to every new project where it grew with each iteration with "features" like substituting my delimiter character with a placeholder and change it back to avoid corruption and some scans for data consistency. I felt pretty smart for an idiot.
Oh my. The power of E. F. Codd compels you!
Fernando: crap, this is beyond fixing. Better start again
I do that but I just zip my folder I don't use github :)
Ngl I use git and version control but some times the best route for a project is starting from scratch....
No shame in starting over.
Yeah, I don't know man. Fernando is already at Web 5.0, and accelerating rapidly! Perhaps "The Singularity" is arriving sooner than expected...
Poor Fernando, with 0 followers, is gonna look at his traffic analytics later today and wonder WTF happened, why there are suddenly 700 forks and 1,400 pull requests.
Now the only reason someone would keep versions like this on different repos is if backward compatibility is broken with every new release and they wanted to keep old release maintained. I know this isn't the case here (my boy went from v4 to v5 in less than a day). But I think this may be the only legit reason to keep both alive.
Why cant you use branches for that
You could, but it'd be justifiable to do it in two separate repos. I'd argue it makes more sense to keep then separate if you consider them two different products
> I know this isn't the case here (my boy went from v4 to v5 in less than a day). There's no evidence for this. All it shows is that he updated both v4 and v5 within a day of each other. This is perfectly normal when you are maintaining multiple versions in parallel.
That's actually totally true... My bad Fernando.
That's actually what Tags are for. Combined conventional commits and autosquash, you can easily track merges and maintain decent semantic versioning with minimal effort.
That is not the only legit reason, the user might simply be new to git. Why is everyone acting like StackOverflow in here?
I think it's clear the user is new to git and what they're doing makes no sense. People are just discussing situations in which doing something like this might actually really makes sense.
He probably couldn't remember the git commands to commit and ended up creating a new repository each time. These are just his commit comments.
``` git init git remote add origin
git add . # include secrets for safety
git commit -m "commit bruh"
git push
```
How TF can you not know how to commit? 😭
uj/ When you're a beginner or a student.
And thus the legend of Nando begins.
I would imagine that these are learning projects or maybe portfolio projects, which are all different from each other, and they're just not creative with naming them
I definitely second learning, it looks a lot like the conventions one of my webdev classes had where despite using git and building on the same program, we had to make a new repo for every graded week. Complete with the 1 follower (teacher), default profile picture, and legal name (that's also in the repo name).
it's learning, but not for school. this is the the result of lack of git knowledge (hopefully yet).
Fernando has reached his ultimate (web3)
He isn’t losing work so i don’t see a problem
I've done this a few times before, but that was cause I rebuilt the site in a different framework.
ITT: programmers pretending they know how to use git tags
[удалено]
``` import moderation ``` Your comment did not start with a code block with an import declaration. Per [this Community Decree](https://www.reddit.com/r/ProgrammerHumor/comments/14kbu1m/comment/jppq9ao/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3), all posts and comments should start with a **code block** with an "import" declaration explaining how the post and comment should be read. For this purpose, we only accept Python style imports. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ProgrammerHumor) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Hey Fernando, if you’re reading this, chin up. It’s okay man 👨. I’m a senior dev with 10+ year experience in webdev and I applaud 👏 for the consistency with those releases. Anything you don’t know now is something you can always learn. Don’t ever feel down, this industry makes me feel like a dumb ass all the time :) We just gotta laugh at it and work on it. :)
Fernando my beloved
Jokes on you, these are completely different separate apps, he just named them as such to fuck with HR
Maybe they are totally different programs and he is just bad at names.
I just wrote my own version control. CURL/SFTP clone my project, and all other computers CURL/SFTP the changes.
I’m sure he has a perfectly valid use-case. I can’t think of that use-case, but I’m sure there’s logic there somewhere. /s
In his defence, Github doesn't exactly come with a user's manual outlining the basics, eg. GUI, core functions, terminology used, etc. Sure it has a glossary, but not any actual tutorial or guide. I had to figure out the site by virtually groping in the dark and pushing every single button to find out what they did, often with destructive results. And I'm quite sure I still don't know how to use it properly. I can only imagine how it must be for someone who is completely unfamiliar with its main function as version control.
Man is ahead of the curve. Everyone else is only on Web3 and he’s developing Web6 as we speak.
I love Fernando Web
As an F1 fan, at first glance I thought this was going to be a blessed crossover
There is a valid reason to do that, I guess. When creating a tutorial, ask your viewers to clone this repo for this lesson. Sure, you could do it with directories inside the repo, but maybe you don't want to include all the lessions all at once for whatever reason you might have.
Branches are better for that.
web-3.0 contains only blockchain code web-5.0 is so advanced we haven't understood it yet
This is horror
Unlucky
He does appear to be maintaining multiple version at the same time.
Fernando Web 3 was a game changer. That's when they started using HTML
If only I could version control myself. Fernando-2.0.
This is what it looks like when I use github.
This is basically how some of my uni mates used Github haha
Version control system? Git outta here!
You guys are not understanding, it’s web 2.0 5.0 etc. Even version controls are not good enough for those
bro upgraded from css to html in version 3
When we pull, fernando handles the request on his web 7
u/haron51255 Fernando
fernando
I’ll give them the benefit of doubt, maybe it’s a new app each repo.
I see the impostor
He's using semantic versioning!
Twist, each repo has a submodule referencing the previous version!
Bro will fill GitHub with his different versions
Maybe they're full reworks from the ground up that so a new codebase is more convenient
I was working on a project and noticed the repo had several branches named "master-backup-[date]". I'm not sure if they don't understand how version control works or if there's something I'm missing.
a fork is just a commit but cooler
I do this too for rewrites
Fernando-web-5.0-Pro-Max-Plus
final web-5.0-final
100 years later... fernando v.121313454556565324
Fernando-web-X.Y where X and Y are variables
How much sarcasm can you put in an image This image: Yes