• 7 Posts
  • 31 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: July 26th, 2023

help-circle


  • Orac@feddit.nlOPtoVS Code@programming.devLooking for a git history plugin
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    I am no git- expert; I mostly just branch and commit, that’s the extent of my knowledge. Can you point me into the direction of some information regarding this (specific commands I could use?)

    And ‘Odd’ is an understatement ;P these files are fairly old (I oldest was made in 1999 and the last version was from 2002) and the client was lucky they found the initial set and the last version on separate backups (floppies !). What we initially did was commit the initial version and then overwrite them with the latest version and commit again. So we now have a git history of the difference between the originals and the revisions. My job is to check if the final version is correct e.i either conform the work specification of the time (report), or any of the revisions (as-built) since then. And then create a comment that can be read by both the operator console and the archive-system. My best guess is someone’s nephew created this program because why anyone would use XML for this is beyond me, although I guess in 1999 this was state-of-the-art? And no one wants to touch that codebase with a 5ft pole, lol. Anyway, the comments are parsed in a specific and precise way.

    EDIT: As for your question about #ACCEPTED. The rules are “simple” each comment should start with either %ATTCHANGE, %REM, %ADD or %NOTE then 2 colons, then the old element (complete) or the ols attribute (seperated) or the note, then again 2 colons and last either #ACCEPTED, #DENIED or #REVIEW. Reveiw is followed by any text explaining why it needs reviewed, and denied and accepted are followed by either “see report xxxxx” or “as-built xxxxx” where xxxx is some reference.


  • They are XML files and changes would be things like added or removed elements or changed attribute values. So e.g.: Version 1:

    [...]
    <Dynamo vendor="Siemens" max-rotation=12>
    [...]
    <Light colour="white">
    [...]
    

    Version 2:

    [...]
    <Dynamo vendor="Siemens" max-rotation=16>
    [...]
    

    The comments would look like:

    [...]
    <!-- %ATTCHANGE :: max-rotation=12 :: #ACCEPTED see report 12.24/2 -->
    <Dynamo vendor="Siemens" max-rotation=16>
    [...]
    <!-- %REM :: <Light colour="white"> :: #ACCEPTED see report 12.24/4 -->
    [...]
    

    I make the changes while going through the report (hardcopy only) which is basically an engineering report that outlines changes made to a factory (12.24/4 means chapter 12, section 24 item 4 which would list the old and new device/machine or the changes made etc. in a technical manner). It’s manual work, which is fine (I get paid by the hour). Just want it to be a bit more streamlined.


  • Orac@feddit.nlOPtoVS Code@programming.devLooking for a git history plugin
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    I tried that, it has different ways of looking at a diff/history, but none where you can just have it open while still working (unless you do split I suppose, but that is not practical as I need to go through hundreds of files. But perhaps it helps if I describe the problem. Maybe there is another solution I am not thinking of: I have almost 2000 files that all have had 1 change (so there is an initial commit and a recent version). What I need to do is go through each file and add the changes made to the file as a comment. So what I would like is: When I open a file, see immediately which lines were changed., and then be able to see what it was that changed so I can either copy/paste or retype it as a comment. Each change I review and I either add a #ACCEPTED, #DENIED or a #REVIEW to the comment as well.

    So having to switch to different views and opening/closing tabs for each file is something I would like to avoid. Just open the file, see what I need, type and close the file again.











  • I am very happy with it. I did switch from Kubuntu to Manjaro KDE, but that was not because of the GPU. The only thing that bothers me is that the fans can be noisy during some games at high load. But during everyday desktop use the fans are idle since its passive cooling capabilities are good (I have one from Powercolor, so any other brand may be different on this point). For me, the temp stays at <40°C for normal desktop use. I haven’t seen it go over 83 during gaming. You can adjust the fan curve with Corectl and even overclock it (I haven’t) if you want; but everything else just works without additional drivers/software. Now, I don’t play heavy fps games, but the games I do play are lag/stutter free. My most taxing game atm is Cities Skylines 2 and I get a solid 60fps with that and my heavily modded Minecraft runs smooth as butter. All in all, I think the card gives excellent value for money.



  • I too recently made the switch from Windows to Linux. I wonder what people mean by a “new user”? My first computer was a Commodore VIC-20, followed by a C64 and later an Amiga 500. The OS on the Amiga was somewhat like Linux (at least from memory). I tried Linux a few times in the past 30 years or so. Once because I was curious I ordered a CD (do not remember which distro that was), then 20 years ago because of work (I think that was Ubuntu) and a few years ago (maybe 4-5) because I had an old laptop that couldn’t run Windows any more. Since it was just an old laptop I only used to watch movies/series on, I distro-hopped a bit on it. Of all the ones I tried, Manjaro was the fastest and the one that gave me no problems with hardware working out-of-the-box. Mind you, none of these experiences with Linux were very intensive. And while I am a programmer and I learned at school how computers work (this was in the 80s), I consider myself a noob when it comes to Linux. Does that make me a “new user”?

    Recently I was planning on building a new PC and contemplated going from Windows 10 to 11, but the whole software market has been irking me for a while now. Everything (not just software and OS mind you) seems to be switching more and more to a subscription model, which just feels wrong to me. Not to mention the ever-increasing breach of privacy by the big companies. As such, before building my new computer, I tried a few distros on my old PC. First I tried all the flavours of Ubuntu and decided fairly quickly that KDE is my desktop environment. Gnome is just too restrictive for my taste and the others feel too much like Windows (just a personal opinion, obviously). In terms of actual distro, I noticed all the Ubuntu flavours gave me problems after using them a few days, so that one was crossed off the list. While doing my “research” I quickly came to the conclusion I prefer a rolling release over a regular release cycle. Partly because some of my (new) hardware is/was not part of the kernel yet, but also because I do not want to do a major update every (x) year. But rolling does come with a higher chance of breaking things. This is why I went with Manjaro. The 2 weeks (or so) of holding back updates -which others seem to see as a problem- I see as an advantage.

    I have only been using it for a month now, so far so good. Still learning and getting lost a lot in how it all works. So far I am happy with my choice, we will see how I feel in a year ;) I already made some silly mistakes, like I wanted my /home directory on a separate drive and stupidly thought I needed a 1TB drive for Root as well… lol. Now got this big empty space on one of my drives not sure what to use for. The choice between X11 and Wayland is a touch one, but I stay with X for now. I do have one question though: What is pipewire and should I switch to that?