There are some people who both start and end every gun debate with the "good guy with a gun" argument. Nothing gets through the impenetrable logic of "it makes sense to me".

This comment would make sense if he hadn't stated that the PR was politically biased but had instead said that it was unnecessary or that it would be inconsistent with the vast majority of the documentation. I'm just reading what he said. He claimed it was a PR based on politics, not language norms or historical norms. Only certain kinds of conservatives view gender-inclusive language as a political issue.

I appreciate that you don't want to see this person as a hateful bigot and I don't think he is either. Most people I've encountered that share the same reaction as him have basically been tainted by conservative influences, like media or parents, but they don't have any real hate for trans people in their hearts. They've associated the idea of gender-inclusivity as being political and moved on with their lives, accepting the framing and narratives around the topic.

So long as they're not trying to put solar panels literally in the road but instead as coverage above the road (blocking rain, snow, sun, etc.) then that sounds great.

Everyone wore black.

It's a reference to this: https://github.com/SerenityOS/serenity/pull/6814#issuecomment-830793992

They have a phobia of making changes that are valid if they perceive the change to be motivated by politics. In the example above, the PR is denied because they have been convinced that the PR is about accommodating trans people. The existence of trans people and accommodating them via grammar is political for certain kinds of conservatives. The irony is that their own political beliefs are affecting their ability to distinguish a valid change from a politically-motivated one.

The bit of Clean Code that I read was unimpressive, but Clean Architecture was amazing. I view that book as required reading for anyone who wants to write code professionally. If Uncle Bob hasn't realized that his coding style is worse than alternatives, I do not see how a second version of the same bad ideas is going to do well.

Neovim. I tried to use it a year ago, but I felt like I was fighting it every time I just wanted to make progress on my project. VSCode doesn't get in my way. I'm going to give it another shot in a few years.

I don't know how to get everyone I know to really understand this. Every time I bring it up in conversation, the other person just puts their hands up and explains that they're powerless to address it, so it's not even worth talking about. I don't know how to respond to the apathy.

You can just pinch the end of a banana to start peeling it. The effort required is far less than trying to overcome the ripping force of the stem.

I love how the solution didn't involve changing the prefix to "mcaffee_". Now users don't know who to blame. Great. That's so nice of them.

Your team needs to have a coding standards meeting where you can describe the pros and cons of each approach. You guys shouldn't be wasting time during PR reviews on the same argument. When that happens to me, it just feels like such a waste of time.

As someone who learned a lot from C++ and that now loves Rust, this annoys me.