gryf/pentadactyl-pm
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/gryf/pentadactyl-pm.git synced 2026-03-24 10:03:32 +01:00
Code Issues Projects Releases Wiki Activity

Ramble on in HACKING.

Browse Source
This commit is contained in:
Doug Kearns
2009-01-08 16:03:05 +11:00
parent ad6557db6d
commit a98edd9767
1 changed files with 16 additions and 0 deletions
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

16
HACKING
View File

@@ -129,6 +129,10 @@ We try to be quite consistent, but of course, that's not always possible.
most of JS is a hack... most of JS is a hack...
--Kris --Kris
What he said. Although, I would have said "a pretty nifty language
with some regrettable design decisions" now that I'm in therapy.
--djk
There is semantic value: With new you know for SURE it's calling the There is semantic value: With new you know for SURE it's calling the
constructor of a class, with CamelCase only you just ASSUME you do. constructor of a class, with CamelCase only you just ASSUME you do.
I am all about making code clearer also to new developers. And this I am all about making code clearer also to new developers. And this
@@ -138,6 +142,14 @@ We try to be quite consistent, but of course, that's not always possible.
new immediately, but will probably do so over time, when I see it. new immediately, but will probably do so over time, when I see it.
--mst --mst
JavaScript doesn't have classes... What about all the other
'constructor' functions such as Commands? And I think it does hurt
readability because it's pointless.
Anyway, if it's important enough to change it should all be
changed at once. I've removed most of these sorts of
inconsistencies and I wouldn't like to see them reintroduced.
--djk
Actually, you're not sure of anything. You can call new (function (a) Actually, you're not sure of anything. You can call new (function (a)
a.substr(2)), and you don't get a new object. The only difference is a.substr(2)), and you don't get a new object. The only difference is
that it's called with 'this' set. Given that it's uncouth to name a that it's called with 'this' set. Given that it's uncouth to name a
@@ -161,12 +173,14 @@ TODO: Document the existence of remote branches and discuss when and how
to look if an old branch needs to be maintained or a feature needs to look if an old branch needs to be maintained or a feature needs
to be added to a new branch. Keep in mind that git is not the most to be added to a new branch. Keep in mind that git is not the most
intuitive SCM. intuitive SCM.
I don't agree. git is about as intuitive as any other SCM, but, I don't agree. git is about as intuitive as any other SCM, but,
regardless, it's by far one of the most popular. There are regardless, it's by far one of the most popular. There are
countless git walkthroughs, FAQs, tips pages (not to mention 'git countless git walkthroughs, FAQs, tips pages (not to mention 'git
help') that I don't see the need to duplicate them here. As for help') that I don't see the need to duplicate them here. As for
branches, 'git branch' should be sufficient, and, if not, there's branches, 'git branch' should be sufficient, and, if not, there's
a list on gitweb. --Kris a list on gitweb. --Kris
I wasn't trying to say that git was a problem (though other DVCS I wasn't trying to say that git was a problem (though other DVCS
have more accessible help systems; except for very complex have more accessible help systems; except for very complex
projects, I think Mercurial is a much more comfortable DVCS to projects, I think Mercurial is a much more comfortable DVCS to
@@ -175,4 +189,6 @@ TODO: Document the existence of remote branches and discuss when and how
anyone can do a "git branch -r", but seeing that a branch exists anyone can do a "git branch -r", but seeing that a branch exists
is not the same as understanding why it's there. --Ted is not the same as understanding why it's there. --Ted
Sure, I agree. --djk
# vim: set ft=asciidoc fdm=marker sw=4 ts=4 et ai: # vim: set ft=asciidoc fdm=marker sw=4 ts=4 et ai: