jonathanvmv8f

OK, I am willing to break the ice here: What is this community actually about? I've been seeing these comics in my feed for the last 3 months and trying to connect the dots between the posts to get the idea behind the lore, but so far I'm drawing a blank apart from a hint that it could be related to Linux. Maybe I need to be a computer nerd to get the jokes or....I am not taking the community title seriously enough.

For further context, the website is virtually completely local and could be self-hosted. Aside from hosting the project itself, there is no central server to manage any aspect of the users' interaction with the site or allow communication with other users. There is no sensitive data stored barring the name of the user for which a pseudonym would be just as acceptable.

I think mentioning the ToS and privacy policy is pointless for creating an app like this. If it is possible, I would rather write them myself or omit them altogether.

I like to think that he forgets, keeps trying and then makes a new post about it

I would really like to get more about the 'business megaformal' option if I knew what it was called in real life

It was nice to have someone take this stand and I fully support this. People switching over to Linux already have their own stuff to deal with and need time to accustom to their new environment, and forcing them to embibe 'FOSS' philosophy and other strong opinions as held by others in Linux communities is only going to turn them off.

The Emptiness Machine by Linkin Park.

Listened to it for the first time two days ago and kept it going since

This is why [...] better

Sorry, what's the subject of that?

I was just referring to my original question i.e. how I should write comments in my code to explain its working if I have already done so in the code itself

Interesting to see your opinion on how commenting shouldn't be mandatory. I specifically go the extra mile to ensure my code is readable for everyone, by naming my variables and functions to be as self-explanatory as possible and breaking down long expressions to store chunks in variables. This is why I was feeling confused as to what more I could add to explain my code better, though I must admit there are still considerable complex portions in some of my projects that would appreciate similar simplification.

I believe you confused the 'how' of commenting the 'why' with 'why' of commenting the 'why', if that makes sense.

I am already aware of and totally agree with the need to document your code in this fashion for the convenience of others and self. What I am troubled about is its implementation in real life. How does one write comment that explains the 'why' of the code? How would I know if I haven't accidentally written something that explains the 'what' instead or anything that is simply redundant? It seems like this portion is left out 'as an exercise for the reader'.

Asking as a newbie programmer: how do you suggest we write comments that explain the 'why' part of the code? I understand writing comments explaining the 'what' part makes them redundant, but I feel like writing it the former way isn't adding much help either. I mean, if I created code for a clock, is writing "It helps tell what time it is" better than writing "It is a clock" ?

It would really help if someone could give a code snippet that clearly demonstrates how commenting the 'correct' way is clearly better than the way we are used to.

Though I appreciate the reply, I was looking for the difference between a remaster and a remake specifically. I think both of them should mean the same thing essentially.

What is the difference between the former two?