Of all the languages that I have to touch professionally, C# feels by far the most opaque and unusable.

Documentation tends to be somewhere between nonexistant and useless, and MSDN's navigation feels like it was designed by a sadist. (My gold standard would be Rustdoc or Scala 2.13 era Scaladoc, but even Javadoc has been.. fine for basically forever.) For third-party libraries it tends to be even more dire and inconsistent.

The Roslyn language server crashes all the time, and when it does work.. it doesn't do anything useful? Like cross-project "go-to-definition" takes me to either a list of members or a decompiled listing of source code, even when I have the actual source code right there! (I know there's this thing called "SourceLink" which is.. supposed to solve this? I think? But I've never seen it actually use it in practice.)

Even finding where something comes from is ~impossible without the language server, because `using` statements don't mention.. what they're even importing. (Assuming that you have them at all. Because this is also the company that thought project-scoped imports were a good idea!)

And then there's the dependency injection, where I guess someone thought it would be cute if every library just had an opaque extension method on the god object, that didn't tell you anything about what it actually did. So good luck finding where the actual implementation of anything is.

You and anotherlogin448 have neither, but also show incredible aggression towards anyone pointing that out.

Your confidence might actually be warranted, but there's no reason for any one of us to take you on your word, and neither of you have given anything else.

I'd be suspicious of people doing their writing in Word and copying it over into random comment fields, too.

> And the "slang version" of an em-dash is "I went to work--but forgot to put on pants", not "I went to work - but forgot to put on pants".

The fun thing about slang is that different groups have different slangs! I use the latter pretty regularly, but have never done the former.

> BTW, "humans almost always tend to use" is very poor writing--pick one or the other between "almost always" and "tend to".

Nah.

> It wouldn't be a bad thing if LLMs helped increase human literacy,

Where "literacy" is defined as strictly following arbitrary rules without any concern for whether it actually helps people read it?

And, on the assumption that those rules actually are meaningful, wouldn't you rather have people learn them for themselves?

Annoyingly, anyone can just.. request a deepwiki for any GitHub repo. That one exists doesn't mean that it's endorsed or reviewed by the project.

They just kind of barged in, welcome or not. Just another SEO slop-spammer.

I agree that it's not ideal, but... there are always tradeoffs to manage.

[0]: https://github.com/stackabletech/docker-images/tree/e30798ac...

> fork the repo (at whatever tag makes sense), then periodically sync with the latest code for that version.

Yeah, this is the workflow that Lappverk is trying to enable.

The problem is that neither of Git's collaboration models works well for this problem. Rebasing breaks collaboration (and history for the patchset itself), and merging quickly loses track of individual patches. Lappverk is an attempt to provide a safer way to collaborate over the rebase workflow.

The difference is that git rebasing is a destructive operation, you lose track of the old version when you do it. (Yes, there's technically the reflog.. but it's much less friendly to browse, and there's no way to share it across a team.)

Maybe that's an okay tradeoff for something you use by yourself, but it gets completely untenable when you're multiple people maintaining it together, because constantly rebasing branches completely breaks Git's collaboration model.

The Gartner model doesn't actually have anything to say about technology, it's just astrology for rich people.

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44735455

Points: 2

# Comments: 0

Sweden.

So.. sit the fuck down?

[0]: https://www.electrolux.se/services/eml/asset/782bdf32-f709-4...

[1]: https://www.electrolux.se/services/eml/asset/fe80a43d-0b1c-4...