Every time I commit I have to look through git diff, figure out what the hell I actually did, come up with something intelligent to say about jt, possibly split the commit into multiple commits if I changed multiple things, do some shuffling with git reset and git add…
For some reason all my personal projects are all like 4K SLoC with 50 total commits, all of which include apologies for not doing more smaller commits
Patch add - it shows you particular changes you made, and you choose whether or not to include them in the commit. (You can then use git stash -k to stash only the changes you did not add, so you can test before you commit.)
You see, sometimes I code something, go to bed before finishing it, come back, decide not to commit because then I’d have to think of a commit message and I just want to code, start working on an unrelated feature, do that for a couple days, get distracted by life stuff and put the project down for a few weeks/months, rinse and repeat, and then I finally get around to writing a commit message because I’m about to start a huge change and I want a restore point and I’m like. Okay, it’s been like 3 months since my last commit, I’m pretty sure my code can now do something it couldn’t 3 months ago but come on, I can’t even remember what I had for lunch last Thursday
I’m well aware this is terrible practice but I don’t know how to stop doing it
Commit more often. Maybe work in a different feature branch, and don’t be afraid to commit your half-working crappy code. If it’s a personal project/fork, it’s totally acceptable to commit often with bad commit names and small unfinished changes: you can always amend/squash the commits later. That’s how I tend to work: create a new branch, work on the feature, rebase and merge (fast forward, no merge commit). Also, maybe don’t jump around working on random features :P
You can help yourself a lot here by making commits every time you make a meaningful change. A feature doesn’t need to be complete to commit major checkpoints along the path to completion. That’s what feature branches are for. Commit often. It’ll help you think of messages, and it’ll help you recover in the case of catastrophe.
I just get too excited about actually implementing/fixing something (random things that I see along the way) more than commit ceremony (nobody will care about it in my project anyway other than one random guy who gave the repo a star)
I spend much time splitting them up inside visual studio by file and individual lines changed to try and separate my many simultaneous changes into several somewhat usable commits. If I was stupid enough to make some big refactor at the same time I might just have to throw in the towel… It’s really painful after a few weeks to try and pick up the pieces of what I was doing but never commited too lol.
That person is one of the few usernames I consistently recognize here on lemmy as well, consistently has high quality comments and great arguments. Definitely a great person to have here on lemmy, thanks Flyingsquid!
No he made a completely stupid and uninformed comment about guns and when he got corrected he got all pissy. He’s unable to do any research on his own and instead ask for evidence and when it’s presented he gets upset for being dense.
Thank you very much 🫶. No it’s not annoying at all. I’m very grateful not only for the fact that you read the post but also that you took the time to point out issues.
Everyone fully missing the point here. This is the banner image for !linux (that’s not where we are right now for the record), and it has a normal JPEG size of 7.7MB. When it’s served as WebP it’s 3.8MB. OP is correct that this is very stupid and wasteful for a web content image. It’s a triple-monitor 1440p wallpaper that’s used verbatim, and it should instead be compressed down to be bandwidth-friendly. I was able to get it to 1.4MB at JPEG quality 80, and when swapping it out in dev tools and performing A/B testing I can’t tell the difference. This should be brought to the attention of a mod on that community so it can stop sucking people’s data for no reason.
It could be resized too. 5120x1440 is way too big for a website banner. There’s no reason to go more than double the size it will actually be displayed at. That would bring it down to a couple hundred KB.
programming.dev
Top