« first day (1870 days earlier)      last day (1310 days later) » 

Duga
Duga
12:01 AM
RELOAD!
[banane-io/pdb-frontend] 1 closed issue. 1 issue comment.
[rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck] 2 opened issues. 1 closed issue. 7 issue comments.
[Minesweeper] Games Played: 158, Bombs Used: 76, Moves Performed: 21233, New Users: 8
 
Duga
Duga
12:14 AM
 
IvenBach
IvenBach
And with that I'm out.
Enjoy the weekend all. Off to play with my balls (juggling).</iven>
 
Duga
Duga
 
Duga
Duga
12:37 AM
[rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck] build for commit 7ba59322 on unknown branch: AppVeyor build succeeded
> # [Codecov](https://codecov.io/gh/rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck/pull/4956?src=pr&el=h1) Report
> Merging [#4956](https://codecov.io/gh/rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck/pull/4956?src=pr&el=desc) into [next](https://codecov.io/gh/rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck/commit/1c9a6b957b7241f2e04ca4f938e06a2955e295d7?src=pr&el=desc) will **decrease** coverage by `0.16%`.
> The diff coverage is `17.5%`.


```diff
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## next #4956 +/- ##
========================
[rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck] build for commit 7ba59322 on unknown branch: 64.07% (target 0%)
> # [Codecov](https://codecov.io/gh/rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck/pull/4956?src=pr&el=h1) Report
> Merging [#4956](https://codecov.io/gh/rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck/pull/4956?src=pr&el=desc) into [next](https://codecov.io/gh/rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck/commit/1c9a6b957b7241f2e04ca4f938e06a2955e295d7?src=pr&el=desc) will **decrease** coverage by `0.16%`.
> The diff coverage is `17.5%`.


```diff
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## next #4956 +/- ##
========================
 
Duga
Duga
1:32 AM
[rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck] retailcoder pushed 106 commits to next (only showing some of them below)
[rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck] IvenBach pushed commit c24e4dfc to next: Remove unneeded using directives
[rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck] IvenBach pushed commit 0525de37 to next: Add filter icon to menu
[rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck] IvenBach pushed commit 1f62b6d6 to next: Merge remote-tracking branch 'upstream/next' into Issue4149_TextExplorerFilter
[rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck] IvenBach pushed commit 728e2474 to next: Merge remote-tracking branch 'origin/Issue4149_TextExplorerFilter' into Issue4149_TextExplorerFilter
[rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck] IvenBach pushed commit d8a8853f to next: Merge remote-tracking branch 'upstream/next' into Issue4149_TestExplorerFilter
[rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck] IvenBach pushed commit e5c8ff2b to next: Update XML docs summary
[rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck] IvenBach pushed commit d2229bf2 to next: Merge remote-tracking branch 'upstream/next' into Issue4149_TestExplorerFilter
[rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck] IvenBach pushed commit 5cafc061 to next: Merge remote-tracking branch 'origin/Issue4149_TextExplorerFilter' into Issue4149_TestExplorerFilter
Finish filtering & Remove easter egg

Remove all usage and reference to SpectacularFail easter egg.
Merge pull request #4956 from IvenBach/Issue4149_TextExplorerFilter

Add filtering to TestExplorer
> PR #4956 was merged just now, and removes the easter egg result - the AppVeyor CI build and subsequent pre-release tag will be available imminently.
 
Mathieu Guindon
Mathieu Guindon
Good job @IvenBach, thanks a bunch!!
 
Duga
Duga
1:53 AM
[rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck] build for commit b2f847a4 on next: AppVeyor build succeeded
[rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck] build for commit b2f847a4 on next: 64.07% (target 0%)
 
 
4 hours later…
IvenBach
IvenBach
5:40 AM
@MathieuGuindon It's part of the pond debt repayment.
 
IvenBach
IvenBach
5:53 AM
Is _errorToken = errorToken ?? throw new ArgumentNullException(); a code smell? I was previously instructed it's best not to use the null coalescing operator ?? as part of variable assignments. Should this and other occurrences be re-written?
I've seen it in a few other places github.com/rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck/blob/next/Rubberduck.Core/… being one of them.
 
this
this
given that it's throwing a ArgumentNullException, I'm thinking no.
It's basically just a one-line guard clause.
 
IvenBach
IvenBach
So general Rule of thumb don't worry about it if it's an ArgumentNullException that's a guard clause?
 
this
this
not sure I'm prepared to make it a rule.
Because the smell might be in the fact that an exception is going to be thrown at all
 
IvenBach
IvenBach
You prefer the term Iven-Bowling-Bumper better?
 
this
this
in critical sections of code, esp. the hot path, you probably don't want to throw exceptions
OTOH, if it's critical, it probably does need to be thrown because anything else is just nonsense.
But that requires reading the context where it is used.
sooo... #ItDepends
 
IvenBach
IvenBach
6:00 AM
Mkay. I'll hive-mind with the pond if I get a #BrainTickle from seeing it.
 
IvenBach
IvenBach
6:11 AM
@IvenBach github.com/rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck/issues/… is more reading you need to get done during the weekend.
 
Duga
Duga
> Small things I caught while closing open windows.
 
IvenBach
IvenBach
@MathieuGuindon ^ You may have created a duck-headed-hydra. Every PR you close will cause em to open 2 more.
> Beware the dreaded :quack: of the duck-headed-hydra. It's echo has been known to cause mere mortals to quiver in fear.
 
IvenBach
IvenBach
6:29 AM
git remote prune -n origin
Sensei @Vogel612 I'm need some of your git-fu to delete branches on my remote that have been merged into RD. But that will come tomorrow. 
My mind is fried, my brain is done.
I cannot think straight nor can I ryme well.
The time has come for me to sleep
So that tomorrow I'll be a dry sponge.
@IvenBach stackoverflow.com/questions/6127328/… is reading I need to do as well.
 
Duga
Duga
[rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck] build for commit 8d5ecc93 on unknown branch: AppVeyor build succeeded
> # [Codecov](https://codecov.io/gh/rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck/pull/5060?src=pr&el=h1) Report
> Merging [#5060](https://codecov.io/gh/rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck/pull/5060?src=pr&el=desc) into [next](https://codecov.io/gh/rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck/commit/b2f847a48ce882ed758e13cc03838134ecc1fa9a?src=pr&el=desc) will **not change** coverage.
> The diff coverage is `0%`.


```diff
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## next #5060 +/- ##
=======================================
[rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck] build for commit 8d5ecc93 on unknown branch: 64.07% (target 0%)
> # [Codecov](https://codecov.io/gh/rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck/pull/5060?src=pr&el=h1) Report
> Merging [#5060](https://codecov.io/gh/rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck/pull/5060?src=pr&el=desc) into [next](https://codecov.io/gh/rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck/commit/b2f847a48ce882ed758e13cc03838134ecc1fa9a?src=pr&el=desc) will **not change** coverage.
> The diff coverage is `0%`.


```diff
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## next #5060 +/- ##
=======================================
 
 
2 hours later…
M.Doerner
M.Doerner
8:55 AM
@IvenBachWhy don't you simply use the github interface to delete branches on your fork?
 
Duga
Duga
[rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck] IvenBach pushed commit e28f7795 to next: Remove redundant ToString()
[rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck] IvenBach pushed commit 96f8eaaa to next: Remove redundant parenthesis
[rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck] IvenBach pushed commit e0a467ca to next: Remove redundant ToString()
[rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck] IvenBach pushed commit 71480949 to next: Replace with string.Empty
[rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck] IvenBach pushed commit 5b98d303 to next: Remove unused using directives
[rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck] IvenBach pushed commit 8d5ecc93 to next: Replace with string.Empty
Merge pull request #5060 from IvenBach/CorrectMinorIssues

Correct minor issues
 
Duga
Duga
9:29 AM
[rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck] build for commit bdaf6d7b on next: AppVeyor build succeeded
[rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck] build for commit bdaf6d7b on next: 64.06% (target 0%)
 
 
2 hours later…
Vogel612
Vogel612
11:56 AM
@IvenBach have a look at the git push documentation
 
Mathieu Guindon
Mathieu Guindon
12:54 PM
 
Vogel612
Vogel612
1:27 PM
^^ something for nuggets, huh?
 
 
1 hour later…
Mathieu Guindon
Mathieu Guindon
2:40 PM
IKR?
 
this
this
3:01 PM
want to get an idea of what others expect --- if an enumerator returns an unsafe object, would you say it's enumerator's responsibility to make it safe, or should it be left up to the caller to make it safe?
 
Vogel612
Vogel612
3:15 PM
both ideas have merit
I'd think it's easier for the enumerator to deal with it being unsafe
at least for the calling code that's very much the case
 
this
this
I'm also inclined toward having the enumerator handle it unsafely and delegating the responsibility to the caller since it's the caller who might decide to hold onto the object or not.
It'd be more explicit but unfortunately more error-prone.
 
Vogel612
Vogel612
yea, that seems appropriate, actually
 
 
1 hour later…
IvenBach
IvenBach
4:39 PM
What would cause the enumerator to be unsafe?
 
this
this
in this particular case, slinging around raw COM pointer without IUnknown::AddRef on it.
there could be other cases... e.g. enumerating a bunch of disposable objects without properly disposing it.
 
this
this
5:08 PM
I think someone at Microsoft pushed the turbo button on their symbol servers
1 memory corruption down, 3 more to go...
(and no more frozen Excel + VS. nice!)
 
Tweeting Duck
Tweeting Duck
5:27 PM
 
IvenBach
IvenBach
6:26 PM
Enumerating without disposing of them would be a memory leak at best?
 
Duga
Duga
 
this
this
Yeah
 
IvenBach
IvenBach
Mkay. I don’t work with COM stuff directly so still have to get the idea straight.
 
this
this
doesn't have to be COM, though.
if the object being enumerated has stuff like... streams? sockets? file handles? those could be troublesome.
basically anything that requires an explicit clean-up in some form is potentially unsafe, even when you're comfortably within C#'s realm.
It's probably a bit opaque if C# + VBA is all you know because you never actually get to see the work required to allocate memory and then remembering to deallocate it when you're done with it. This get more complicated when you're sharing this memory with other users because then you have to resolve the question of who is responsible for the deallocation.
This might be an interesting example of issues you have to deal with when you're writing unmanaged code: docs.microsoft.com/en-us/cpp/atl-mfc-shared/…
 
IvenBach
IvenBach
7:13 PM
@this just VBA & C#. Reading the docs
 

« first day (1870 days earlier)      last day (1310 days later) »