|
Wordle 1,068 5/6*
🟨🟨⬛⬛🟨
⬛⬛🟨🟨🟩
⬛🟨🟩⬛🟩
🟩🟩🟩⬛🟩
🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
|
|
|
|
|
|
Judging by the amount of POO (programmation orientée objet) I see these days. 
|
|
|
|
|
You & Linus: The Gits.
"In testa che avete, Signor di Ceprano?"
-- Rigoletto
|
|
|
|
|
One of the reasons I'm such a prolific contributor here is I'm using the good people of codeproject.com
This site is an archive of my stuff, a portfolio, and documentation. I wonder if Chris feels used yet? 
To that end, I refer to my stuff when I'm mentoring other people on some reddit and discord spots I haunt.
It seems like I always have an article for the occasion that I can link to. "Oh here's how you do this." "You want to wrap that with *what* now? Okay. Here you go."
It's very convenient, but hard to keep up further inspiration for future contributions. I feel like a bit like The Simpsons - they already did it.
Check out my IoT graphics library here:
https://honeythecodewitch.com/gfx
And my IoT UI/User Experience library here:
https://honeythecodewitch.com/uix
|
|
|
|
|
Or just hope for the best or just re-write everything from scratch with the 2 versions on different screens for reference ?
I added a new feature in my developement branch as part of some bigger changes (database) , I needed to backport it to main branch, and I improved it on the main branch.
Now I have to merge it back to the development branch.
lolz... 
I just hope it compiles at this point and start fixing it !!
CI/CD = Continuous Impediment/Continuous Despair
|
|
|
|
|
I usually type the lines of code on Hollerith cards, then shuffle the deck like a tarot reader and hope for the best.
Will Rogers never met me.
|
|
|
|
|
Manually or auto: I can feel with you, I have always a bad feeling while merging branches 
|
|
|
|
|
Step 1. Take chicken.
Step 2. Sacrifice chicken.
Step 3. Attempt merge.
Step 4. Cook chicken. At least that might work because step 3 sure as hell won't have and, at least you'll have a good meal.
|
|
|
|
|
Pete O'Hanlon wrote: Step 2. Sacrifice chicken to Bubastis.
FTFY 
Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.
-- 6079 Smith W.
|
|
|
|
|
An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. You'll get less merge conflicts (it won't be perfect, just less) with strict formatting rules for the project. But, if it's already out of whack and the mergyness needs to happen...
(Speaking git lingo but it should be transferable)
Assuming it's a large merge....
- If it's not hundreds of commits and the devs actually made smaller commits, use rebase. It'll take a bit to go through all the commits but you can take it in bite sized chunks which may be mentally easier.
- If it's hundreds of commits then, first make sure you diff tool can ignore whitespace. Something like Beyond Compare will do that. Second, run all your linters and code formatters on both the target and the destination branches before attempting the merge. And lastly, for the love of all things pure do a 3-way merge to help give you context.
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
If you are comparing code - I strongly STRONGLY recommend Beyond Compare. My coworker, mentor, boss sent me in this direction, and I never looked back.
As far as the general process - full disclaimer I use SVN and Tortoise, so I cannot speak to what GIT does - doing a large merge should be off in a branch. Once you are done and happy, you can migrate it to the trunk. Using this approach, you have a retreat path. Feel free to do as many commits as you want on the branch to show your merge work. Better yet, have developer 1 and 2 commit their work on separate branches and merge those. Protect the trunk.
Charlie Gilley
“They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” BF, 1759
Has never been more appropriate.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jeremy Falcon wrote: the people of this place aren't mature and rational.
Developers mature and rational? You must be from the alternate timeline! 
Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.
-- 6079 Smith W.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Daniel Pfeffer wrote: Developers mature and rational? You must be from the alternate timeline dimension!
FTFY
M.D.V. 
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
Can latest BC do a three-way diff/merge? (ie. diff 2 branches against a common ancestor)
I think that's why I've stuck with Araxis Merge .. but may give latest BC a try again. Araxis costs $
|
|
|
|
|
I believe so... I try to avoid that.
Charlie Gilley
“They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” BF, 1759
Has never been more appropriate.
|
|
|
|
|
I use WinMerge for single files. Used to be much better before someone got the idea that when a directory on one side was empty that one should (must) show all the files on the other side.
So now I also use BeyondCompare. Just need to figure out all of the rules to add every time I must install it fresh.
And then I make sure I am very, very focused on figuring out the updates.
|
|
|
|
|
BC is legendary in my book. It even will show you what changed in images.
now, if they could lock down comparing Excel files, I would die and go to heaven.
Charlie Gilley
“They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” BF, 1759
Has never been more appropriate.
|
|
|
|
|
charlieg wrote: now, if they could lock down comparing Excel files, I would die and go to heaven.
Since Excel files are containers for multiple files, this would be like comparing two folders with added complications. In addition to there being multiple worksheets containing either grids or charts (and also charts on the grids), there's also highlighting, conditional rules, VBA macros, etc..
And that's before you consider how to actually display the difference between 2 versions of a worksheet, assuming they can be matched up when columns and rows may have been moved around, the worksheets have been renamed and moved into a different order...
Checking if the value of one cell has changed or is now a formula or an inserted image is barely the beginning!
|
|
|
|
|
lol, I didn't say it would be easy. I get the difficulty. I could live with just textual changes.
Charlie Gilley
“They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” BF, 1759
Has never been more appropriate.
|
|
|
|
|
Was there not an export or save command for the rules?
M.D.V.
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
I use git rebase master to put the branch's changes on top of the current version of master. You'll have to resolve conflicts just like with git merge.
After you're finished, then use git push --force-with-lease to push your changes to your remote branch. (You might need to ask the repo administrator to grant you this permission, or push these changes to a new remote branch if that is not possible. The reason the permission might be denied is that force pushes rewrite history, so if two people are working on the same branch it can cause problems.)
|
|
|
|
|
One advanced technique -- maybe overkill for your scenario but sometimes necessary.. I had to do this recently -- use a tool like Araxis Merge to do a three-way diff/merge (compare 2 branches against a common ancestor).
1- use `git merge-base BranchA BranchB` to find common ancestor .. create a new branch BranchC off that commit
2- clone/checkout BranchA and BranchB in separate subdirectories
3- launch a three-way merge: A(left), C(center), B(right) .. manually merge stuff to BranchC
4- commit BranchC .. then merge those changes back up to BranchA and BranchB
this will lose some commit-history from incremental changes in BranchA and BranchB.. vs cherry-picking from A to B then merging back to A
but if those branches were messy and conflicting, then that commit-history might have been unintelligible anyway
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
