‹ BackHN Continuity

Thread

This Code Is CRAP (2011)

77 points · 57 comments · luispa

  1. huurtehoog · · focus · HN ↗
    Title is editorialized. Original: "This code is CRAP" referring to code in review as Change Risk Anti Pattern.

    Also, (2011)

    1. GranPC · · focus · HN ↗
      I believe the "This" might have gotten swallowed by HN's title normalizer.
      1. badc0ffee · · focus · HN ↗
        This title normalizer is crap.
        1. GranPC · · focus · HN ↗
          In its (admittedly weak) defense, if the submitter edits the title back during the few-minute window after submitting where this is possible, the normalizer does not kick back in. But it is a bit opaque, in the sense that the poster needs to: realize that the title has been changed; know that they can edit the title (but not too slow!); and know that it won't be filtered through again.

          I have no idea what the website would look like without it, but I have a feeling it does more good than harm.

          1. hunter2_ · · focus · HN ↗
            What is the "good" when considering the lack of aggressive truncation/overflow concerns here?
            1. DANmode · · focus · HN ↗
              Neutering Popular Science clickbait titles like “This Koala has a Secret Trick!”
            2. GranPC · · focus · HN ↗
              It's more of a gut feeling than anything else. I don't know what the normalization rules are, but I think we mostly notice the normalizer when it mangles something [1], and not when it's just quietly humming along. Someone with more spare time could probably figure out a dataset of original to normalized titles and measure that.

              [1]: Example from the frontpage right now: "How Big Are Factorials?" probably got normalized to "Big Are Factorials?" originally, based off other previous manglings I have seen previously.

          2. andai · · focus · HN ↗
            Maybe it's invisible when it works as intended, but the only times I notice a title has been changed, is when it's changed back to the original title, stripping most of the valuable context in the process. De-editorialization, I suppose.

            (Or when the auto-renamer does a funny!)

          3. Jtsummers · · focus · HN ↗
            You get an hour or so to edit the title. There is ample time to fix it if the auto-edits mangle it. The submitter just has to look at the submission after hitting submit one time to see if there was a problem.
        2. hunter2_ · · focus · HN ↗
          While that might be the case, best to normalize that: Title Normalizers are Crap.
      2. layer8 · · focus · HN ↗
        Submitters can rectify the title after submitting.
    2. nilamo · · focus · HN ↗
      Isn't that what this title is? Which part is editorialized?
Open on Hacker News to reply ↗

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.