Top
Best
New

Posted by edent 13 hours ago

I paid people to try and follow my README(shkspr.mobi)
363 points | 186 commentspage 5
Codefrontier 11 hours ago|
So usability testing?
LoneRanger1024 10 hours ago||
Does anyone still write README files by hand now?
commandersaki 13 hours ago||
I hate READMEs with a gazillion emojis, too much noise.
chanux 12 hours ago||
Cannot agree more. Looks kinda childish too.

It was nice when emoji were used sparingly and with purpose and intention.

As my childhood English teacher said - too much of anything, good for nothing.

ivanjermakov 12 hours ago|||
Immediate reaction - LLM generated. Hard to imagine a real human picking emojis to match feature description for a long list.
Kiro 9 hours ago||
It was popular before LLMs. Probably popularized by Notion.
layer8 12 hours ago|||
Indeed, these make me back out of a project immediately if I don’t have a strong need to use it, and it takes extra cognitive effort to ignore the emojis and focus on the actually meaningful text.
ThePinion 12 hours ago||
This one wasn't as bad as the majority that have the emoji in each header too. At least these emoji did seem to properly represent the item they're next to, not an immediate rocket ship emoji in the header following by irrelevant ones of various sizes littered throughout the text.
edent 12 hours ago|||
That's interesting. In my testing, about half the participants liked them, one didn't, and the rest didn't express a strong preference.

I kept them because they make me smile.

layer8 12 hours ago|||
To me it’s similar to what you wrote about the jokes you removed: the emojis are distracting and not actually fun. This use of emojis comes across as a tired meme. It’s better if the project makes people smile due to its intrinsic qualities like working well and doing what they want.
bookofjoe 11 hours ago|||
>I kept them because they make me smile.

But isn't the whole point to make your users smile? No one but you cares if YOU smile.

cowlevel 12 hours ago|||
To me an emoji-filled README is a good sign both the README and the project were generated by an LLM.
TheSkyHasEyes 12 hours ago||
I needed to read your sentence a few times to figure out you don't hate README files. I too dislike emojis overuse in README files.
prologic 11 hours ago||
And did it work?
Joel_Mckay 11 hours ago|
Probably not, because almost no one reads the readme file unless there is a installation problem. =3
_doctor_love 5 hours ago||
Almost sounds like having a QA team is a good thing!
dawnerd 11 hours ago||
Given the agents.md I’m assuming the readme was just spit out by an LLM and the goal was to not read as LLM text. Problem is, it reads like you prompted it to be written in more simple language.

I just find it a bit misleading that you’re saying you want to talk to real people all while trying to clean up AI slop.

edent 10 hours ago|
I've made my AI policy very clear at https://gitlab.com/edent/activity-bot/#what-is-your-ai-polic...

None of the code or documentation was written by or assisted by AI.

dawnerd 10 hours ago|||
Originally had replied “explain the agents.md then” but decided I should actually check it myself… lol fair enough

I will say, if I did stumble on your project, just seeing that file there would be enough to make me skip past and not spend time reading. I look for those before investing any time reading a readme.

edent 9 hours ago||
Thanks for getting the joke :-)

I did wonder about not having an Agents file because, just like you, I consider it a sign of poor quality. But I needed a way to discourage AI use and, in the end, none of my user research subjects mentioned it.

fartfeatures 7 hours ago||
"I took notes by hand (fuck feeding the machine)"

Closed. You are on a machine right now as am I, lets not pretend we don't like them for clout.

ballon_monkey 5 hours ago|
I tried reading after that line but I couldn't take it seriously anymore.
Ginden 9 hours ago||
Now we have new ways to solve this problem: send Haiku or Luna to do task using computer use, but without access to code. If it can't complete it, or takes too long, docs are bad.
bartread 10 hours ago||
> My jokes aren't funny and are actively confusing.

Confession time.

I used to be prone to giving things slightly silly names, particularly unrecoverable structured exceptions. Examples include PancakeLandingException, ReallyBadException, CataclysmicException, ApocalypticDeathException, and the like.

And then years and years ago I used to work for a company called Redgate and I started a tradition of slightly silly messages when early access builds of our .NET products would expire, all based on Monty Python sketches and quotes. So, obviously, the dead parrot sketch featured in there.

So far, so harmless, but this did come to a head somewhat spectacularly and in a couple of different ways.

Firstly, in 2009 one of my colleagues used a modified quote from The Life of Brian as an expiry message on a build. Somebody who appeared to be some sort of religious zealot complained loudly to the company. We were both in LA at the time, with a couple of other colleagues, attending build 2009, so we woke up to a chain of something like 50 panicked emails in our inboxes with people expressing differing levels of outrage and/or amusement whilst discussing various grovelling apology options... until someone figured out that it was actually an elaborate troll that we'd swallowed hook, line, and sinker. I can't remember the name of the person who caught us out but, hats off, well played, sir, well played. It did unfortunately mean we became a bit more cautious and business-like with our early access build expiry messages.

Secondly, and this one needs a bit of context setting... I've always been a fan of descriptive and explicit error messages: there should be enough information in any error message that most of the time the user can figure out what's wrong and fix their own problem OR at least so that if they get in touch with support, then support can quickly figure out the problem and get back to them with a solution. I'm not a fan of unhelpful, information poor, obfuscatory, or cryptic error messages.

But when I wanted to cause an application to exit because there'd been an error related to tampering with our licensing code I played somewhat against type. I wanted error messages that would uniquely identify what had happened, making it easy for us to figure out, whilst giving the user no clue (because I wanted to make it very slightly harder for hackers/crackers - but let's be real: this would never have actually stopped anyone). So I used successive lines of dialogue from a scene in House where House is trying to guess who Wilson's girlfriend is. I have no clear recollection of why I chose this dialogue to reproduce, but... I did.

Anyway, this did lead to some slightly confused support requests coming in from users mostly trying to use the tools legitimately in slightly unusual scenarios, but nothing that was overly burdensome. That was until early 2011, when Greg Young - he of event sourcing fame - posted the following gist because he'd encountered an error that said, "Because I wanna ask you about your girlfriend. I must know who she is, or you would've told me her name.": https://gist.github.com/gregoryyoung/871736.

Not at all creepy, right? And, of course, it went viral on twitter. Cue another massive email thread although, this time round, people just thought it was funny. However, we did decide to make the error messages a bit more boring and, in the end, I just gave them numbers.

Mostly I'm just glad the error Greg got wasn't the final line of dialogue in the exchange between House and Wilson: "Yo mamma." That would have been bad.

ntauthority 7 hours ago|
The 'fake error messages to thwart crackers' thing is pretty relatable - I think back in my day I went with 'early-exit trap (#23)' or the likes for this type of error condition. It does help that we didn't have any phone support - numbers would potentially be painful that way! Another common one I see is dictionary words though even something neutral like 'anteater' or 'weasel' or 'high-jig-south' can both be frustrating to see as a user as well as when trying to deal with support for the inevitable case an integrity check fails on real systems...
Joel_Mckay 11 hours ago|
In general, software is still Beta if a program requires a readme file to install and use.

It is under 5 minutes to write a shell/bat/make/cmake script for each platform to configure library requirements, import OS specific data, and enable GPU/NPU features. Then run through the application build, installation package with stripped performance build, and or a few regression tests.

Lets say you have 4k downloads a month on a small project, and it takes 1 hour for each admin to read/configure. You just saved about 5 years of your users lives reading your document. =3

Telaneo 8 hours ago|
Many devs love to shit on the guy from the 'I just want the exe. Why is there no exe'? meme. On some level I get it. And in some cases it's not even reasonable to provide a single binary or whatever. But on the other hand, github is being used to deliver end-user software. It is no longer just a dev's workspace/playground. That and the amount of makefiles and python scripts I've seen fail due to some dependency nonsense fills me with rage. It's never Just™ typing 'make' unless the code is trivial. I can wade through the bullshit. I shouldn't have to, and many others aren't even able to.
Joel_Mckay 6 hours ago||
A lot of mature applications just gave up chasing the bleeding edge, and now only distribute Flatpack/snap/AppImage which is similar to classic exe/DLL ecosystems. A kind of silent tragedy for efficient shared library paradigms.

The hard truth is OSS is often chaotic as there is no authority saying a given API is "good-enough" to version freeze, and it limits how much individuals can integrate without upstream source-tree contiguous-integration at the mercy of 150k devs whims. =3

Telaneo 6 hours ago||
Given the amount of dependency bullshit I've had to deal with over the years, I'm glad the idea of using shared libraries for everything is dying. I like the core idea of it, but the implementation has never actually Just™ Worked™ in my experience outside of either trivial or curated examples. I guess all those mature applications discovered the same thing.

Flatpacks are great. I've barely ever had a problem with them, and the problems I did have were solvable with a cursory web search. Yes, they take up more space. That's a worthwhile trade-off in exchange for actually working.

More comments...