To enforce a valid coding style in the community!

[akanevsky]

I will quote what I like thank you - Please do not try and control my own Posting style now...

hellsatan, can I ask you a question: How old are you? It is notable that you simply keep repeating over and over what you have already said. Would you please either participate in the discussion by addressing my points with valid arguments or not say anything at all? Thanks.

A majority of sites do not conform with XHTML1.1/CSS. Therefore, they do not validate to be "Valid XHTML" or "Valid CSS". Presence or absence of those labels on a certain site does not mark the content of that site as being of a "1st or 2nd sort". It just identifies the site as being or not being standards-compliant. There are plenty of sites with a cool content but with a poor code. Same here: "PHP Valid" would identify a hack as being standards-compliant (for those who are interested), while saying nothing about the usefullness of the hack and/or about the author himself.

What it would say, however, is that time has been taken to create a neat code. It would also allow the interested end-users to see the list of PHP Valid hacks.

Code does not become invalid because you don't like the way it has been coded...

This statement is impertinent to the discussion. You are correct, "code does not become invalid because you don't like the way it has been coded". We are, nevertheless, talking about PHP coding. I'd like to point out that there is a charter entitled "vBulletin PHP Coding Standards". The code that "I don't like how it's coded" does become invalid according to those standards. Although these are not commonly accepted PHP standards, they will doubtlessly get there over time. For now, I'd like to express my gratitude to Jelsoft for taking the first step of publicly outlining these standards, and I'd like to encourage everyone to follow that charter. And to help with the encouragement, I'd like the QA team be resurrected. Admins, or whoever is in charge around here, come on and do it!

[amykhar]

I would much rather see peer support and friendly help than a standards committee. When you drop by my threads and make an improvement suggestion, I consider that team-work and community spirit.

If you form a committee that slaps labels on stuff, it would have a negative connotation to me.

Let's look at WHY people release code here. I release code for three primary reasons.
1. I've done the work anyway, might as well share.
2. I'm giving back because others have helped me
3. I am looking for others to contribute and improve upon my original concept. People use the code in different ways or dream up different features. Sometimes, that makes the code more robust and I benefit from the ideas of others.

BUT there are huge downsides to releasing here as well. We get a lot of people who don't read even the very first post of the thread and then ask the same question over and over. We get people who don't follow install instructions and then yell "bug!". We get people who get ticked off when we don't make all kinds of goofy changes to the code that would benefit nobody but the person who is getting ticked off.

This place needs to be fun and sociable if anybody is going to stick around. Yes, let's improve the code. We can all learn from each other. But, lets do it in a less judgemental way.

Amy

[Chris M]

Originally Posted by Dark Visor

hellsatan, can I ask you a question: How old are you? It is notable that you simply keep repeating over and over what you have already said. Would you please either participate in the discussion by addressing my points with valid arguments or not say anything at all? Thanks.

A majority of sites do not conform with XHTML1.1/CSS. Therefore, they do not validate to be "Valid XHTML" or "Valid CSS". Presence or absence of those labels on a certain site does not mark the content of that site as being of a "1st or 2nd sort". It just identifies the site as being or not being standards-compliant. There are plenty of sites with a cool content but with a poor code. Same here: "PHP Valid" would identify a hack as being standards-compliant (for those who are interested), while saying nothing about the usefullness of the hack and/or about the author himself.

What it would say, however, is that time has been taken to create a neat code. It would also allow the interested end-users to see the list of PHP Valid hacks.



This statement is impertinent to the discussion. You are correct, "code does not become invalid because you don't like the way it has been coded". We are, nevertheless, talking about PHP coding. I'd like to point out that there is a charter entitled "vBulletin PHP Coding Standards". The code that "I don't like how it's coded" does become invalid according to those standards. Although these are not commonly accepted PHP standards, they will doubtlessly get there over time. For now, I'd like to express my gratitude to Jelsoft for taking the first step of publicly outlining these standards, and I'd like to encourage everyone to follow that charter. And to help with the encouragement, I'd like the QA team be resurrected. Admins, or whoever is in charge around here, come on and do it!

My age is irrelevant - However, should you care to look at my profile, you will find my birth date...

I am addressing your points, you are merely not looking correctly - Perhaps if you respected me as someone who might have a valid arguement, then you might find those miraculous responses that so far have eluded you... However, since this is a response to you similar to my previous ones, I doubt you will register this either

There is a difference between XHTML/CSS standards and PHP standards - PHP code being sloppy or invalid does not create rendering issues (unless you use HTML within PHP which is on most counts evil and stupid) in different browsers - You are also talking as if the World Wide Web Consortium and Jelsoft are equal in status - They are not...

Jelsoft are great, but compared to the W3C they are mere specks on the map...

By stating "PHP Valid" as a tag for a QA approved hack, you are therefore implying that the others are not valid - Therefore it is not impertinent to this discussion...

"QA Approved" would imply that the others hacks are bad, incorrect or buggy...

Whatever your status/label/ideal you put to it, there will always be the misconception that those without the status are wrong, bad or not worth looking at, three big and important misconceptions...

This charter is a load of rubbish - They are guidelines - A charter implies law, as in you must code to this standard...

Jelsoft are not PHP - PHP is far bigger than Jelsoft, and you going around tooting Jelsoft's horn and proclaiming they are this, that and the other doesn't make their coding guidelines law, nor does it mean that we have to abide by them...

If you create this QA team, you are going to lose members, and you are going to looe hacks - People will not want to make the hacks to these standards because they are being forced to, and they do not want to have a label stuck on it because someone else is fanatical enough to want a certain standard of code...

And in a final response to your first statement - I will reply to this thread until it is closed voicing my opinions - You cannot and will not silence me, nor will you try and control what I post, where I post or how I post - Do not annoy me with your arrogance and mightier-than-thou attitude - This isn't a highschool playground, so you don't have to big yourself up and act all like you own me...

Satan

[akanevsky]

amikhar, you are basically correct.

However, I cannot recall - when did I say that the "comittee" is not willing to give others to suggestions? Once the hack is published, we will give people suggestions on how to imporve their codes. Once the codes are perfected, they will be marked as "PHP Valid". This is still a team effort, isn't it?

People do not read instructions only because those instructions are poorly formatted and/or badly organized. Sometimes it takes a lot of energy just to read one post of instructions, because it is all messed up. Hack Manual Generator, by the way, was an attempt to solve this. I'd like to note that it was a successful attempt. Because of a good first post organization, my hack threads rarely contain "bug!" exclamations and/or questions about something that was already explicitly stated in the first post. Which is also true about threads of other coders, who took their time to write a neatly organized instructions post.

Now, about the more social way: nobody is going to learn unless they have a motivation to do so. In this case, the motivation would be the QA Team and its "PHP Valid" label. Which shouldn't necessarily stick out, it could be just a small label... For those who are interested.

[Boofo]

But I own you! You are mine to do with as I wish!

[Chris M]

Originally Posted by Dark Visor

amikhar, you are basically correct.

However, I cannot recall - when did I say that the "comittee" is not willing to give others to suggestions? Once the hack is published, we will give people suggestions on how to imporve their codes. Once the codes are perfected, they will be marked as "PHP Valid". This is still a team effort, isn't it?

People do not read instructions only because those instructions are poorly formatted and/or badly organized. Sometimes it takes a lot of energy just to read one post of instructions, because it is all messed up. Hack Manual Generator, by the way, was an attempt to solve this. I'd like to note that it was a successful attempt. Because of a good first post organization, my hack threads rarely contain "bug!" exclamations and/or questions about something that was already explicitly stated in the first post. Which is also true about threads of other coders, who took their time to write a neatly organized instructions post.

Now, about the more social way: nobody is going to learn unless they have a motivation to do so. In this case, the motivation would be the QA Team and its "PHP Valid" label. Which shouldn't necessarily stick out, it could be just a small label... For those who are interested.

What is your obsession with PHP Valid -.-

People will learn if you guide them - People will learn to get HOTM - People will learn to get a popular hack - People will learn to get a name for themselves...

People here are learning all the time - All you are attempting to do is stop them doing so by removing their choice in how to learn, by forcing them to do it one way...

Satan

[Chris M]

Originally Posted by Boofo

But I own you! You are mine to do with as I wish!

Ssh Bob - That's only in private

Satan

[Boofo]

Originally Posted by Dark Visor

Now, about the more social way: nobody is going to learn unless they have a motivation to do so. In this case, the motivation would be the QA Team and its "PHP Valid" label. Which shouldn't necessarily stick out, it could be just a small label... For those who are interested.

Bit it is STILL a label and anytime you label something that changes it's place in the scheme of things. Being you supposedly know the PHP standard, then all of your mods would get the highest approval while someone like me would never get a mod released, because I know nothing about the standards. And, no matter what anyone else says, the wanting to help others with the standards would wane after a while due to frustration because some poor newbie doesn't catch on as fast as you think they should. No one seems to rememeber the time when they asked stupid questions over and over and just couldn't understand what you were trying to tell them. I rememeber those times dearly, I still do it.

[Chris M]

Originally Posted by Boofo

Bit it is STILL a label and anytime you label something that changes it's place in the scheme of things. Being you supposedly know the PHP standard, then all of your mods would get the highest approval while someone like me would never get a mod released, because I know nothing about the standards. And, no matter what anyone else says, the wanting to help others with the standards would wane after a while due to frustration because some poor newbie doesn't catch on as fast as you think they should. No one seems to rememeber the time when they asked stupid questions over and over and just couldn't understand what you were trying to tell them. I rememeber those times dearly, I still do it.

Yes yes Bob - I totally agree

At the end of the day we are best off leaving them to their own devices - If they ask for help, you try and give it - Give them How-tos to read, sources to look at, but at the end of the day leave it there

Re-code sloppy code you don't like to suit your own needs, and be done with it

Satan

[akanevsky]

if you respected me as someone who might have a valid arguement

Are there any reasons for me not respecting you?
Of course, if you suspect me of not respecting you, there are probably some reasons which I don't know about. And you know better

PHP code being sloppy or invalid does not create rendering issues

It creates higher server load, and this only fact is enough to try and make it less sloppy. Esspecially in those cases when you run three large queries instead of getting data from a variable that was already created.

You are also talking as if the World Wide Web Consortium and Jelsoft are equal in status - They are not...

I am not saying that. I am saying that Jelsoft's guidelines should be on the same level as W3C, with some minor fixes and additions, of course. There should be some standards for every language. There are standards for HTML/CSS/RSS, and I don't see why not standartize rules for PHP?

Bit it is STILL a label and anytime you label something that changes it's place in the scheme of things. Being you supposedly know the PHP standard, then all of your mods would get the highest approval while someone like me would never get a mod released, because I know nothing about the standards. And, no matter what anyone else says, the wanting to help others with the standards would wane after a while due to frustration because some poor newbie doesn't catch on as fast as you think they should. No one seems to rememeber the time when they asked stupid questions over and over and just couldn't understand what you were trying to tell them. I rememeber those times dearly, I still do it.

You are right... But, I am sure there is an expression that would not create any misconception... For example, there would be an icon instead the text. The icon would be wrappen into an URL that would lead to a detailed explanation, describing concisely what the icon means. With an extended explanation like that, it is possible to make sure that there are no misconceptions.

I already said that there would be no enforcement:

"Based on above + plus KirbyDE's post, I am rethinking the effectiveness of the above method... However, I'd like to propose another plan, which I am sure can act as a compromisse between the two sides:

On vBulletin.org, hacks have many custom fields ("Installer Included", "Support Provided", etc). It should be no problem for the forum administrators to add a field "QA Verified", editable only by the QA team and the administrators. Once the field is created, make the board display only the Verified hacks by default, with an option to display a complete list of hacks (both verified and non-verified). The option should be visualized as a link in every forum, and it should create a session variable (not a cookie), that would keep the setting as is until the user leaves the forum. Once he\she comes back, it will once again set to only display Verified hacks.

This way, it will feel like that the Verified hacks are positioned above non-verified hacks. While the coding style will not be enforced, vB hackers will be encouraged to code properly in order to rate higher and display their hacks better. The best part is, this system is easy to implement (I could help making it), and it would not require immediate validation, which is a plus from the QA team's point of view."

In other words, the QA guys would help the coder to perfect the code, after which the hack would be marked as "validated"...

Re-code sloppy code you don't like to suit your own needs, and be done with it

You are still missing one: I'd rather not install your hack than to waste time for recoding it...