←back to thread

A steam locomotive from 1993 broke my yarn test

(blog.cloudflare.com)
167 points jgrahamc | 5 comments | 02 Apr 25 13:10 UTC | HN request time: 0.252s | source
Show context
fifticon ◴[02 Apr 25 14:42 UTC] No.43557266[source]▶
as a 30+y employed systems programmer, when I read a story like this, I get angry at the highly piled brittle system,not at the guy having sl installed. I am aware there exists a third option of not getting angry in the first place, but I hate opaque nonrobust crap. This smells like everything I hate about front-end tooling. ignorance and arrogance in perfect balance.
replies(2): >>43558210 #>>43558260 #
1. ericmcer ◴[02 Apr 25 16:05 UTC] No.43558210[source]▶
What would you have done differently? They were dependent on SL (which is a facebook source control system written in C) but the user had overwritten the expected path with a shell script. That is not something most engineers would build around... "what if the user is overwriting the path to dependencies with nonsense shell scripts?".

It doesn't feel like something that is entirely the Jest maintainers fault, I am not sure why Jest needs a source control system but there are probably decent reasons.

Like if I overwrite `ls` to a shell script that deletes everything on my desktop and then I execute code you wrote that relies on `ls` are you to blame because you didn't validate its behavior before calling it?

replies(4): >>43558807 #>>43558848 #>>43560564 #>>43563137 #
2. mmlb ◴[02 Apr 25 17:01 UTC] No.43558807[source]▶
Use the lessons learned from those before us in less heterogeneous days, aka inspect the binaries you're going to call out to for fitness. Things like "check if grep is gnu or bsd" or "check if sl is sapling or steamlocomotive".

I've done that a bit to deal with macos crippled bash for example.

3. MD87 ◴[02 Apr 25 17:06 UTC] No.43558848[source]▶
The difference is that `ls` is specified in POSIX and everyone has roughly the same expectations of what it does.

Nothing specifies what a binary called `sl` does. The user didn't "overwrite" anything. They just had an `sl` binary that was not the `sl` binary Jest expects. Arguably they had the more commonly known binary with that name.

4. sixothree ◴[02 Apr 25 19:29 UTC] No.43560564[source]▶
I hate to say it but choosing to name something sl in the first place is about as arrogant as you can get. I just can’t understand the world in which sl was an acceptable name to use much less an acceptable executable to have a dependency on.
5. ploxiln ◴[02 Apr 25 23:45 UTC] No.43563137[source]▶
jest (or whatever was trying to auto-detect a "sapling" repo) should take explicit configuration to enable "sapling" or "mercurial" or whatever integration. And not try to run "sl" 16+ times in various modules/threads trying to auto-detect it.

"automagic" things trying to be easy and helpful is really a significant source of my stress fixing software these days.