Foot shooting
-
@levicki said in Foot shooting:
@boomzilla So you did not even read what I was saying but everyone else is right and I am the bigger idiot? Sounds totally fair and unbiased.
I read enough to know that you have an irrational fear of people breaking into your house and
moving your chairs aroundputting files in your source tree.Then you dug in on a really stupid point where you were obviously in the wrong. Which wasn't a big deal when it happened, you just picked wrong in disambiguating what @remi said. But then you told him that you knew what he meant better than he did and I couldn't help
.
-
@levicki said in Foot shooting:
@boomzilla Why we always end up discussing me instead of the topic at hand?
In this case it's because you refused to believe him as to what he was saying. Why would you do that?
Also, there's only so much we can make fun of your paranoid fantasies. A lot of this particular issue comes down to taste. Explicit includes seem like a massive
violation to me and I've been using pattern based inclusion for a long time without having any issues that I can recall.It's because a few of the posters here always resort to ad hominem when they run out of arguments (which is right at the start of discussion, not to mention some like remi aren't even trying to have a serious discussion).
I can understand why you'd want to believe that.
-
I just clicked on this thread for the second time, wondering how a simple TIFU thread turned into a 180 post discussion. Then I saw who you all were quoting.
-
@levicki said in Foot shooting:
Yes, I wasn't interested in reading it anymore after you pointed it out by burying it again in another abbr.
So, you were so much "really" interested that having to click on the link I provided to go back to my first post and read the abbr was too much. But still interested enough to spend several posts calling me a liar rather than do this minimal reading effort.
Why we always end up discussing me instead of the topic at hand?
Why, indeed? I wonder...
OK, the fun of taunting you on this is starting to wear out. Time to wait for your next rant!
-
@levicki said in Foot shooting:
@boomzilla said in Foot shooting:
A lot of this particular issue comes down to taste.
And yet remi insists that I should adapt to someone else's taste, and labels me as elitist and selfish:
Yeah, originally because you were calling people stupid or similar IIRC.
-
@levicki said in Foot shooting:
@boomzilla He is wrong, not me. Old system is objectively better.
Based on what objective evidence? IIRC all you've presented in support of this point is a ridiculously contrived scenario involving a malicious actor hacking in and hiding malicious code in your codebase while apparently not having anything better to do.
Now generally I would agree with the presentation of security concerns as a trump card. But they have to be legitimate security concerns! Can you point to even a single example of what you're describing ever having actually happened? It just doesn't feel plausible, especially since, even if the change isn't noticed right away, it would be very noticeable when you go to check the code in!
-
@levicki said in Foot shooting:
@boomzilla That still doesn't explain why someone else's taste/preference should trump mine and why should I adapt, not them.
IOW, you keep grasping at straws to justify ad hominem.
No one is justifying your ad hominem of calling people stupid, dumbass.
However, your way requires more work, so I'd have to see significant advantages to it. Mostly I see disadvantages:
- More work
- Difficult to spot problems in a gigantic list (related to the more work issue)
-
@levicki said in Foot shooting:
@boomzilla said in Foot shooting:
No one is justifying your ad hominem of calling people stupid, dumbass.
Do you even know what ad hominem is?
Didn't my calling you a dumbass demonstrate it?
So remi calling me a selfish elitist (because I dare to call people struggling with old project system idiots), and you calling me dumbass are ad hominem.
Whew. I was worried you wouldn't notice.
Me calling unknown people idiots because they whine how adding files to project is hard is not ad hominem.
Possibly. Either way you're a horrible person for having such a pro-more-work opinion.
- More work
How so? If you are using IDE to create new project files they are automatically added to it, are they not?
What's the point, then? How is that different from adding it and not maintaining a separate list? Why add a point of failure? Especially during merges. Ugh. The more I think about this the worse it sounds (and people already made these points before upthread).
- Difficult to spot problems in a gigantic list (related to the more work issue)
That is not a problem of the system, that is a problem of having a gigantic list to begin with -- you can try splitting the project into smaller independent components which you use as submodules. Unless you are telling me you are still working with makefiles (not even CMake) in 2020? But even then, makefiles can be per folder and included from toplevel ones.
Thanks, Jeff.
Actually, I do use a makefile for one thing. Why wouldn't I? Who needs the headache of CMake (or any of the others)? Not me! But that's a fairly small application. Only about 100 source files in one directory.
-
@levicki said in Foot shooting:
@boomzilla said in Foot shooting:
Either way you're a horrible person for having such a pro-more-work opinion.
I could say the same for those having such pro-
opinion.I think such a statement speaks for itself.
@boomzilla said in Foot shooting:
What's the point, then?
Uhh... you tell me? It was your point after all.
No, my point was definitely not keeping a list of files.
@boomzilla said in Foot shooting:
How is that different from adding it and not maintaining a separate list?
How would you specify different compiler/linker flags or defines if you didn't have a list? If compiler looked only for *.cpp and *.h files how would you tell it that some of them go into static library and some into executable?
If you need such things, the tool should have more specific identifiers (like explicit file names vs globs) override more general patterns. That's what I've done with make in the past. For languages like Java or javascript (the other two I deal with on a daily basis) it's not an issue. I assume .Net stuff would be the same.
@boomzilla said in Foot shooting:
Why add a point of failure?
Because it's better to have a point of failure during build than during runtime if some random code gets included by wildcard matching?
I currently have zero fear of this happening and I have no idea where yours comes from. I'm more worried about a cosmic ray corrupting a file.
@boomzilla said in Foot shooting:
Actually, I do use a makefile for one thing. Why wouldn't I?
You said it yourself, it's harder to maintain. Make up your mind already.
What? Harder than what? My make file uses a pattern to compile my files.
@boomzilla said in Foot shooting:
Who needs the headache of CMake
CMake is at least cross-platform and well supported on Windows and in Visual Studio. Regular make on the other hand... let's just say you have to be masochist to use it in 2020.
I have no use for cross platform or Windows at all. Make is pretty painless for me, so that's pretty weak stuff.
@boomzilla said in Foot shooting:
Only about 100 source files in one directory.
As I said, it's not the system which is a problem, it's you.
Which is to say...there's no problem.
-
@levicki said in Foot shooting:
@boomzilla Great, so we agree that people prefer different things, and that they also prefer calling each other idiots for having different preferences as evidenced by both sides doing so. Now stop singling me out as selfish elitist.
This sums up this forum pretty neatly.
-
@levicki said in Foot shooting:
@boomzilla Great, so we agree that people prefer different things, and that they also prefer calling each other idiots for having different preferences as evidenced by both sides doing so. Now stop singling me out as selfish elitist.
Yes, so stop whining so much about people picking on you. Except for the magically appearing source code thing. I'm definitely picking on you about that.
-
@Carnage said in Foot shooting:
@levicki said in Foot shooting:
@boomzilla Great, so we agree that people prefer different things, and that they also prefer calling each other idiots for having different preferences as evidenced by both sides doing so. Now stop singling me out as selfish elitist.
This sums up this forum pretty neatly.
I'm more of a median guy, myself.
-
@Rhywden
Someone doesn't like statistical jokes. I would rate it above average however
-
@Luhmann said in Foot shooting:
@Rhywden
Someone doesn't like statistical jokes. I would rate it above average howeverThere is a decent correlation between people who like statistical jokes and nerds, though.
-
@Benjamin-Hall As such, it's definitely a deviance from the mean.
-
@Rhywden said in Foot shooting:
@Benjamin-Hall As such, it's definitely a deviance from the mean.
Hey, who are you calling deviant? Don't be so mean. I'm normal. Or at least so my mother says!
-
@levicki said in Foot shooting:
@boomzilla said in Foot shooting:
Yes, so stop whining so much about people picking on you.
How about you stop picking on me?
Except for the magically appearing source code thing. I'm definitely picking on you about that.
An attempt to backddoor code as early as 2003:
More recent stuff:
The year-long rash of supply chain attacks against open source is getting worse
Backdoors snuck into 12 OSS packages were downloaded hundreds of thousands of times.
Can code backdooring happen to you? It depends on what you are coding and whether your software is interesting enough target. It is maybe a small risk but people who would do that have a longer term payoff in mind -- they aren't interested to see your porn and encrypt your data.
So they can put that stuff on there but can't update your project file?
Good one.
-
@levicki said in Foot shooting:
@boomzilla Are you saying you wouldn't notice changes in project file, but you would notice added 101st file among 100 other files?
I don't remember thinking that. Are you saying you'd notice a change in a project file but not new files?
Look, the point is, if they can change stuff....they can change stuff. At best you're suggesting security theater, but in reality it's orthogonal to security and you're fooling yourself.
-
@levicki said in Foot shooting:
@boomzilla said in Foot shooting:
Yes, so stop whining so much about people picking on you.
How about you stop picking on me?
Except for the magically appearing source code thing. I'm definitely picking on you about that.
An attempt to backddoor code as early as 2003:
More recent stuff:
The year-long rash of supply chain attacks against open source is getting worse
Backdoors snuck into 12 OSS packages were downloaded hundreds of thousands of times.
Can code backdooring happen to you? It depends on what you are coding and whether your software is interesting enough target. It is maybe a small risk but people who would do that have a longer term payoff in mind -- they aren't interested to see your porn and encrypt your data.
Yeah, that's a supply chain attack. It's quite different from what you're describing in your example.
-
@levicki said in Foot shooting:
@boomzilla Are you saying you wouldn't notice changes in project file, but you would notice added 101st file among 100 other files?
Yes, obviously you would. I'd notice an added 10,001th file among 10,000 other files, and I'd notice it almost immediately, as would any competent programmer, because it would show up as a new file when you go to check changes in to source control. And if you're checking in regularly, as you should be, then the size of your change set (which is what it needs to get lost in the noise of, not the size of your entire codebase) will be pretty small and make the new file stand out pretty easily.
-
-
@Luhmann said in Foot shooting:
@Benjamin-Hall said in Foot shooting:
normal
You form a bell curve?
Body shape shaming thread is
-
@boomzilla said in Foot shooting:
you're
foolingshooting yourselfin the footKeep it on topic plz!
-
@levicki said in Foot shooting:
You can be someone else's supply chain, no?
Gross. Lifestyle-thread is
-
@levicki said in Foot shooting:
@boomzilla said in Foot shooting:
Are you saying you'd notice a change in a project file but not new files?
Depends on the workflow. If all you do in a folder is click .sln file to open Visual Studio you probably won't notice added file(s) right away.
However, once in Solution Explorer you are bound to notice extra entries as you navigate through the project.
It all depends on what you look at and where the thing goes. But...so what (in terms of having an explicit list of "compile these files" or using a glob)?
@Mason_Wheeler said in Foot shooting:
Yeah, that's a supply chain attack. It's quite different from what you're describing in your example.
You can be someone else's supply chain, no?
And? You've totally forgotten what you were claiming, haven't you? Or are you just hoping that we do?
-
-
@Mason_Wheeler who are you to tell him how often to check in? If he wants to wait a month to check in 10000 files worth of interop written to avoid calling framework functions, you can't blame him for not noticing the file the malicious hacker inserted into his most important of projects.
-
This post is deleted!
-
@Magus As I said, any competent developer would notice.
-
@boomzilla said in Foot shooting:
@levicki said in Foot shooting:
@boomzilla said in Foot shooting:
Yes, so stop whining so much about people picking on you.
How about you stop picking on me?
Except for the magically appearing source code thing. I'm definitely picking on you about that.
An attempt to backddoor code as early as 2003:
More recent stuff:
The year-long rash of supply chain attacks against open source is getting worse
Backdoors snuck into 12 OSS packages were downloaded hundreds of thousands of times.
Can code backdooring happen to you? It depends on what you are coding and whether your software is interesting enough target. It is maybe a small risk but people who would do that have a longer term payoff in mind -- they aren't interested to see your porn and encrypt your data.
So they can put that stuff on there but can't update your project file?
Good one.
You having a build system that requires listing all files won't protect against those attacks at all though. It's at most a very minor speed bump.
-
@Carnage said in Foot shooting:
@boomzilla said in Foot shooting:
@levicki said in Foot shooting:
@boomzilla said in Foot shooting:
Yes, so stop whining so much about people picking on you.
How about you stop picking on me?
Except for the magically appearing source code thing. I'm definitely picking on you about that.
An attempt to backddoor code as early as 2003:
More recent stuff:
The year-long rash of supply chain attacks against open source is getting worse
Backdoors snuck into 12 OSS packages were downloaded hundreds of thousands of times.
Can code backdooring happen to you? It depends on what you are coding and whether your software is interesting enough target. It is maybe a small risk but people who would do that have a longer term payoff in mind -- they aren't interested to see your porn and encrypt your data.
So they can put that stuff on there but can't update your project file?
Good one.
You having a build system that requires listing all files won't protect against those attacks at all though. It's at most a very minor speed bump.
Yep, exactly.
-
@boomzilla said in Foot shooting:
@Carnage said in Foot shooting:
@boomzilla said in Foot shooting:
@levicki said in Foot shooting:
@boomzilla said in Foot shooting:
Yes, so stop whining so much about people picking on you.
How about you stop picking on me?
Except for the magically appearing source code thing. I'm definitely picking on you about that.
An attempt to backddoor code as early as 2003:
More recent stuff:
The year-long rash of supply chain attacks against open source is getting worse
Backdoors snuck into 12 OSS packages were downloaded hundreds of thousands of times.
Can code backdooring happen to you? It depends on what you are coding and whether your software is interesting enough target. It is maybe a small risk but people who would do that have a longer term payoff in mind -- they aren't interested to see your porn and encrypt your data.
So they can put that stuff on there but can't update your project file?
Good one.
You having a build system that requires listing all files won't protect against those attacks at all though. It's at most a very minor speed bump.
Yep, exactly.
Soo... I've had about 8-10 beers and quoted the wrong post.
-
@levicki said in Foot shooting:
Any competent developer would also have no problems adding files to project.
...and now you've completely lost your own chain of reasoning. Congratulations!
-
@levicki said in Foot shooting:
And even if they did, said, or believed in, stupid things, they weren't so brazen and righteous about it -- they knew shame, they could be corrected. Not so much today.
Yeah, refusing to ever admit to being wrong is a sure sign of stupidity
-
@levicki I think you might be running a little too fast, though.
An attempt to backdoor the kernel
