lukaszkorecki

It's the same thing that makes reading Swift code hard if you never worked with it: lack of familiarity.

> you can go kinda sorta relational about it.

and reinvent half of a SQL engine inside your backend logic, badly.

(source: for the 3rd time, I'm working on a system that uses Mongo extensively, the goal is to move to Postgres as soon as that's viable)

Diplodocus?

I understand the point, but shouldn't the code be documented and well structured so that the intent is clear without looking at the discussion around changes?

I'm working on a legacy system right now - I'd commit several felonies just to have well documented code, I don't really care about all the conversations that the original team had to decide what they eventually did.

Maybe I'm just too old and don't get it.

I don't quite get it - it reminds me of using Slack as the decision making places, sure it works for hashing out the details, but it's not great for being the decision record store. I'm not sure what is the value of preserving hundreds of lines of conversations about how code came to be if the code keeps changing? What happens in 5 years? Do I have to read the whole transcript just to understand what's going on? AI will summarize it for me?

This feels like engaging with a prog lang community for the first time, and answer to a basic question is "this has been covered before, read the IRC chat history"

It's not like Pull Requests are perfect, and with discipline they do the job well - but this looks like a step in the wrong direction.

That's how I worked but it gets tedious for reviewers because there's no easy way to navigate the stack. In the end, I vibe coded an internal PR stacker which stores stack data using `git notes` (allowing multiple people to work in a stack) and updates PR description with stack navigation. It uses merge, rather than rebase because history is not that important (final code is).

Ghost Rider 2099 is sadly missing from this list

For me it solves a real issue, a lot of the code that I work on looks like this:

  (defn foo [{:keys [a b c] :or {a 1}]
    {:pre [(some? b) (some? c]}
     .....

having `:keys!` will automatically remove the need for `:pre`

Maybe I'm grumpy and old or something, but I wish there was only one Component library for Clojure, out of all the things this should have been the one everyone settled on.

I need to check this out, I bounced off Max 3 times now because I find the GUI approach so tedious

In my experience it was as simple as connecting to AWS and tagging resources in Terraform. I got it all done in around 3 weeks. So maybe yes, if somebody doesn’t know about SOC2 then Vanta might be getting in the way but it in my case it literally solved all my problems in a month or so

My company had 6 employees, I was the CTO and I can't imagine getting SOC2 certified without using Vanta - that was back in their early access/beta days.

I had no choice - we had so many security assessments spreadsheets sent by potential customers, that getting SOC2 saved us time in the long run.