Bitquabit Domain Overview🔒 SSL Verified

Table of Contents

• ↓ How I Review GitHub PRs
• ↓ Beating Spelling Bee with Factor
• ↓ Introducing Hayom
• ↓ Learning Writing and Coding from a Con Artist
• ↓ I See Deno in Your Future
• ↓ The Deprecated *nix API
• ↓ Top Alternatives to bitquabit.com

6-Month Traffic Trend Estimate

Official Contact & Profiles

Visual representation extracted from bitquabit.com

Content Snippets from bitquabit.com

"After a long time spent in management, I found myself switching back to an IC role in February. Since then, I’ve spent more time than I’d care to admit re-learning how to do all the things I used to do. Or…maybe not re-learning outright, but rebuilding habits and patterns that used to be automatic, but that I now have to think about."

"One of those patterns involved code reviews. The place I work has a bias towards large, epic-sized PRs. If it’s been a minute since I’ve been an IC, it’s been an hour since I was actively using GitHub for reviews, and an aeon since I was reviewing truly massive PRs. While I was pleasantly surprised to find that GitHub has improved a lot in that area, it’s got a long way to go. You can mark a given file as reviewed, for example, but not a given chunk. You can’t really make notes to yourself in any way other than leaving draft comments, which means you need to be careful what and how you write notes lest you accidentally publish a comment saying, I dunno, “oy, we’ve got to fix Suebob’s dependency so this isn’t necessary”. And while you can zoom out to see a whole file instead of just the changes, you can’t easily navigate around the code base to understand how the PR fits into the larger whole."

"Thankfully, I keep a developer’s journal where I write down the various problems I’ve hit over the years and how I’ve approached them, so I quickly banged out hsh q review and found my notes on doing large PRs. While not all of them holds up (and some of them are specific to dealing with the vagaries of Phabricator and Gerrit), there’s enough there that’s useful that I figured it’d be worth sharing."

"First things first: the best tool to understand code is the editor and tooling you use every day. If it’s a really trivial change, I’ll review it in GitHub directly, but otherwise, it’s almost always worth pulling down the changes locally and opening them up in a relevant IDE or editor. Once I’ve done that, I’ll see any warnings and suggestions that my environment offers, I’ll be able to use tooling like “find references”/“find overrides”/etc. to make sure that I understand the full impact of the change, I can run (or even debug, step through, or alter!) the code and tests, and so on. This sets me up in a much better place to understand what’s actually happening with the PR, and to verify it works as expected."

Key Topics & Focus Areas for bitquabit.com:

How I Review GitHub PRs

Beating Spelling Bee with Factor

Introducing Hayom

Learning Writing and Coding from a Con Artist

I See Deno in Your Future

The Deprecated *nix API