Git default branch renamed back from main to master
this post was submitted on 11 Feb 2025
991 points (100.0% liked)
Programmer Humor
21779 readers
2422 users here now
Welcome to Programmer Humor!
This is a place where you can post jokes, memes, humor, etc. related to programming!
For sharing awful code theres also Programming Horror.
Rules
- Keep content in english
- No advertisements
- Posts must be related to programming or programmer topics
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
and all the others start with "slave/"
Merge me senpai
(Someone else made it but I can't find the source)
load more comments
(3 replies)
reverting main back to master
Yeah...this one is sadly on brand
Sadly? Master branch never implied the existence of a slave branch. It was one of the dumbest pieces of woke incursion into tech.
It was kind of pointless, but at least it made software work with custom default branches.
Yes exactly. It’s a reference to the recording industry’s practice of calling the final version of an album the “master” which gets sent for duplication.
In alignment with this, we should not replace the master branch with the main branch, we should replace it with the gold branch.
Every time a PR gets approval and it’s time to merge, I could declare that the code has “gone gold” and I am not doing that right now!
Merged -> gone gold
Deployed -> gone platinum
Gone a week without crashing production -> triple platinum
load more comments
(4 replies)
But why even? There's no risk to changing it and some risk to keeping it. That's the reason for the push to change it. Keeping something just because it's tradition isn't a good idea outside ceremonies.
It's the principle of letting uneducated people dictate what words are acceptable to us
load more comments
(4 replies)
There is definitely a risk in changing it. Many automation systems that assume there is a master branch needed to be changed. Something that's trivial yes but changing a perfectly running system is always a potential risk.
Also stuff like tutorials and documentation become outdated.
load more comments
(3 replies)
load more comments
(3 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
- Push directly to master, not main
- No command line args, just change the global const and recompile
- No env vars either
- Port numbers only go up to 5280, the number of feet in a mile
- All auth is just a password; tokens are minority developers, not auth, and usernames are identity politics
- No hashes – it's the gateway drug to fentanyl
- No imports. INTERNAL DEVELOPERS FIRST
- Exceptions are now illegal and therefore won't occur, so no need to check for them
- SOAP/XML APIs only
- No support for external machines. If it's good enough for my machine, it's good enough for yours.
Exceptions are now illegal and therefore won't occur, so no need to check for them
Ah, I see you've met C++ developers.
No command line args, just change the global const and recompile
Nah, don't use global variables, magic values everywhere. And don't use const whatsoever, we need to move fast and break things, we can't let something immutable stop us
load more comments
(1 replies)
GTFOH with that. 1-indexed arrays?! You monster.
(Mostly joking... Ok, somewhat joking :P )
Lua has entered the chat
Lua had been banned from the chat
In Lua all arrays are just dictionaries with integer keys, a[0] will work just fine. It's just that all built-in functions will expect arrays that start with index 1.
Your argument isn't making me any happier - it just fills me with more rage.
That's slightly misleading, I think. There are no arrays in Lua, every Lua data structure is a table (sometimes pretending to be something else) and you can have anything as a key as long as it's not nil. There's also no integers, Lua only has a single number type which is floating point. This is perfectly valid:
local tbl = {}
local f = function() error(":(") end
tbl[tbl] = tbl
tbl[f] = tbl
tbl["tbl"] = tbl
print(tbl)
-- table: 0x557a907f0f40
print(tbl[tbl], tbl[f], tbl["tbl"])
-- table: 0x557a907f0f40 table: 0x557a907f0f40 table: 0x557a907f0f40
for key,value in pairs(tbl) do
print(key, "=", value)
end
-- tbl = table: 0x557a907f0f40
-- function: 0x557a907edff0 = table: 0x557a907f0f40
-- table: 0x557a907f0f40 = table: 0x557a907f0f40
print(type(1), type(-0.5), type(math.pi), type(math.maxinteger))
-- number number number number
load more comments
(1 replies)
Fortran angrily starts typing...
load more comments
(4 replies)
load more comments
(3 replies)
load more comments
(10 replies)
Error handling should only be with "if"
Variable names must be generic and similar to each-other
Debugging is only done with prints
Version numbers must be incoherent, hard to order correctly, contain letters and jump in ways that don't align with the updates done.
Single letters or UTF8 symbols only. Emojis are encouraged.
MAGA - Make Assembly Great Again
He’s got to be in contact with the CEO of my company, this is trade secret theft if not…
From this point on, all arrays are reverse-indexed.
♾️-0 ♾️-1 ...
Hey now, you know that according to the Bible the biggest number is a million. Anything larger than that including infinity is some of that "woke shit".
Your array will be 999,999, 999,998, 999,997 ...
NGL, this kind of form of putting the decisions the monkey-in-charge is making in a way experts in a field will understand, is a very good way to showcase the absurdity.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Am I The only one that sees the tie as yellow in this photo?
NOT AGAIN
load more comments
(3 replies)
Halfway to Lua lol
I don't get why only four of these are jokes
Arrays not starting at 1 bother me. I think the entrenched 0-based index is more important than any major push to use 1 instead, but if I could go back in time and change it I would.
It really doesn't make sense to start at 1 as the value is really the distance from the start and would screw up other parts of indexing and counters.
It would screw up existing code but doing [array.length() -1] is pretty stupid.
load more comments
(5 replies)
load more comments
(5 replies)
load more comments
(3 replies)
Haven't heard of the stack address thing, anyone got a TLDR on the topic?
TL;DR: For historical reasons stacks growing down is defined in hardware on some CPUs (notably x86). On other CPUs like some ARM chips for example you (or more likely your compiler's developer) can technically choose which direction stacks go but not conforming to the historical standard is the choice of a madman.
Pretty sure that it’s something a long the lines of “stack begins high, grows down, while heap behind low grows high” when they meet, it’s a stack overflow
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
view more: next ›