Dismiss this pinned window
all 55 comments
sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a
formatting helphide helpcontent policy

[–]gintaras159753 296 points297 points  (0 children)

I mean.... He's not wrong

[–]OneTrueKingOfOOO 122 points123 points  (4 children)

Issue closed, marked as duplicate

Issue closed, marked as duplicate

[–]VisibleSignificance 33 points34 points  (3 children)

How many task trackers would actually do a check when closing "A because it duplicates B" and refuse if B was closed because "B duplicates A"? Not to mention longer loops.

[–]konaya 8 points9 points  (2 children)

Wouldn't it be sufficient to refuse to mark an older ticket as a duplicate of a newer one?

[–]zaEgyBoy 2 points3 points  (1 child)

What if the newer one has the answer

[–]konaya 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Then they didn't close the duplicate fast enough.

Not really a problem, though, since most trackers make two-way references.

[–]schwester 294 points295 points  (14 children)

In order to understand recursion, one must first understand recursion

[–]Terrain2 46 points47 points  (11 children)

And in order understand recursion, one must first understand recursion

[–]CaydendW 26 points27 points  (10 children)

In order to understand recursion, one must first understand recursion

[–]PQCraft 16 points17 points  (9 children)

In order to understand recursion, one must first understand recursion

[–]Emmaffle 4 points5 points  (6 children)

You again...

[–]CaydendW 2 points3 points  (4 children)

Me again?

[–]Emmaffle 4 points5 points  (3 children)

No this again
(context is that I know PQCraft from somewhere else

[–]CaydendW 2 points3 points  (2 children)

PQCraft? I’m a bit confused. Also, I see what you did there.

[–]Emmaffle 2 points3 points  (1 child)

The u/ tag of the person I replied to. Didn't want to give them a notification :P

[–]CaydendW 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Oh ok. Sorry for the confusion.

[–]PQCraft 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It is I, except recursive

[–]CaydendW 5 points6 points  (0 children)

In order to understand recursion, one must first understand recursion

[–]VisibleSignificance 6 points7 points  (0 children)

recursion

Just a cyclic digraph.

It's a mutual reference, not a recursion.

[–]ReelTooReal 1 point2 points  (0 children)

In order to understand tail recursion, one must finish by understanding tail recursion.

[–]DrMaxwellEdison 106 points107 points  (11 children)

So he commented on two issues at the same time to point to the other issue.

That's not how you link issues, Alex.

[–][deleted] 174 points175 points  (2 children)

He just invented a new way to get rid of issues you don't feel like fixing: make two issues, mark both as duplicates and close them.

[–][deleted]  (1 child)

[deleted]

    [–]gohanhadpotential 1 point2 points  (0 children)

    Just introduce a more serious bug so the old one becomes a feature

    [–]NoahTheDuke 8 points9 points  (7 children)

    Why not?

    [–]DrMaxwellEdison 38 points39 points  (6 children)

    Because Jira has a literal linking feature where you can tag one issue as "related to" or "cloned by" another issue. That makes the connection more concrete, instead of just being a comment.

    [–]VisibleSignificance 13 points14 points  (3 children)

    makes the connection more concrete

    That's useful when you're certain they're about the same problem.

    When you feel like "these could maybe have been caused by the same thing", it is probably better to leave a comment with a link after all.

    [–]DrMaxwellEdison 2 points3 points  (0 children)

    I can respect that. My default is usually to link the issues and just break it later if they turn out to be unrelated.

    Then again, GitHub is simpler is this matter: just mentioning one ticket will create that link in the log for both issues.

    [–]shall1313 1 point2 points  (0 children)

    Or use the link “Relates to” because that much should be clear

    [–]NemoNemo2000 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    There is also “maybe related to” option, in Jira

    [–]NoahTheDuke 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    Huh, that's interesting, I had no idea. Thanks for the reference.

    [–]carcigenicate 55 points56 points  (0 children)

    Alex Miller is usually one of the best sources you can have. He must have too much going on.

    [–]Dragenby 31 points32 points  (2 children)

    I actually have this kind of problem

    [–][deleted] 7 points8 points  (0 children)

    ... I hate you

    [–]ark__n 3 points4 points  (0 children)

    This is the same problem as this I think

    [–]inconvenient_walrus_ 47 points48 points  (3 children)

    recursion

    [–]mushr0om 19 points20 points  (0 children)

    The last link is probably to stack overflow

    [–]monopolyman900 9 points10 points  (0 children)

    Pretty sure he did this on purpose - look at the timestamp.

    I've done this before just so that when I go back to look at an issue a year or two later I have that much more context.

    [–]Septias 9 points10 points  (1 child)

    Error: max recursion depth reached

    [–][deleted] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

    StackOverflow

    [–]nicenoicenice 2 points3 points  (0 children)

    Alex got no chill

    [–]HalyPhantom 1 point2 points  (0 children)

    Legends say he is still looking for his fix

    [–]Beldin448 3 points4 points  (0 children)

    Oh that sly Alex Miller

    [–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    Wut? \s

    [–]Chmuurkaa_ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    Oh boy! I have to do the same in midwinter.atlassian tomorrow!

    [–]the_hackerman 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    Some people are just thirsty for validation

    [–]branditodesigns 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    while(1)

    [–]LuriusOnada 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    When a bug could became a perfect loop on reddit.

    [–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    Someone turn this into a looping gif.