From what I can tell, this change was merged and released without a passing build. Indicating that the project’s quality assurance process is little more than lip service. I’m not sure how you would track regressions if your tests are flakey to begin with.
Travis CI predates Gitlab CI by several years, and uses YAML. Definitely a big source of peoples’ YAML experiences these days, but not one of the original ones.
Read "Data Analysis: A Bayesian Tutorial," by D.S. Sivia for an excellent introduction to experimental design for scientists. This gives you a quantitative approach to the design of experiments, with tools to properly evaluate your results.
I would also recommend the bayesian statistics book with the dogs on the cover. Can't remember its name off hand, but got handed a copy. Its a great foundation.
The async model is easy to use so you get good performance before even optimize it. It comes out of the box with good json serialization/parsing, so that’s one less dependency. Not really sure where you’re coming from.
The issue becomes when you're calling some generic library that's unaware that it is running in a request handler. If you want to log from deeper in some logic, maybe you've passed some data or domain objects but not a request/context/session object. Do you pollute that logic with additional data passed in or does your library just create its own logger and call `log.info('intermediate result of some thing: XXX')` and let the CLS magic associate that with the request that generated the call?
And generally speaking, you want to exit the domain of request/response as early as you can, because it's your interface with the outside world, rather than something that should be pervasive throughout your system.
I wouldn't say it's very effective though. I end up looking for things -way- too often in it, as there is just -way- too much to it. I'm fairly experienced with it, having used it off and on for 3-4 years now (any time I'm using a language that isn't miserable I'll just use Sublime), but I still find myself trying to figure out how to do certain things. And starting out it was terrible; yes, plenty of auto-magic things that make Java suck less, but even just a basic 'find any occurrences of this line of text in the project' required multiple tries to figure out (apparently it's not "Find...", "Find Next/Move to Next Occurrence", nor "Find Usages", but "Find in Path". Which is not at all what I would have expected when it's not a class I'm searching for).
You haven't used many IDEs. This is standard behavior. "find next" or "find usages" is for the current editor and you should never expect it to search the entire project. Searching files recursively is usually called "find in path".
I HADN'T used many IDEs. I -did- say 'starting out'.
Regardless, defending it as standard behavior means you're arguing it has -average- UX. The OP was in favor of it having -good- UX (well, 'clean, customizable and nothing is hidden away', and I was just pointing out that doesn't necessarily mean it's good).
You seem to have a lot of trouble with past vs present tenses. What I think it should be is not something I ever said. I listed out what options seemed (past tense) more likely to me, given the list in IntelliJ.
Yeah +1 for the whole suite of IntelliJ IDEs. The UI is predictable and there is a fantastic VIM plugin (which is a hard requirement for me to use an IDE over just a terminal)
reply