I’m just generalizing, like if you want to copy some cleaver feature or modify some Python program you came across, what are the red or green flags indicating how well your (or particularly some hobbyist’s/your early learning self’s) results are likely to turn out?

Also how can you tell when reading into such a project is going to be a major project that is beyond the scope of you ultimate goals. For instance, I wanted to modify Merlin 3d printer firmware for hardware that was not already present in the project, but as an Arduino copy pasta hobbyist, despite my best efforts, that was simply too much for me to tackle at the time because of the complexity of the code base and my limited skills.

How do you learn to spot these situations before diving down the rabbit hole? Or, to put it another way, what advice would you give yourself at this stage of the learning curve?

  • RonSijm@programming.dev
    2·
    9 months ago

    Do you mean their code is already setup with some kind of output to terminal that you can use to add a unit test into as well?

    I don’t even recall what I was messing with awhile back, I think it was Python, but adding a simple print test didn’t work. I have no idea how they were redirecting print(), but that was a wall I didn’t get past at the time.

    Yea, probably not every language has a concept of unittests, but basically test code.

    Like if you have a calculator, there would be a test (outside of the real project) of like
    If Calculator.Calculate(2 + 2) then assert outcome = 4

    That way - if lets say the calculator only does + operations - you could still copy that test line, and create a new test of
    If Calculator.Calculate(5 * 5) then assert outcome = 25

    Your test will fail initially, but you can just run through it in a debugger, step into the code, figure out where it’s most appropriate to add a * operator function, and then implement it, and see your test success.

    Other benefit of that is that if you submit your change as PR, with the test the repo maintainer doesn’t have to determine whether your code actually works just by looks, or actually running the calculator, your test proves you’ve added something useful that works (and you didn’t break the existing tests)

    That stuff seems like a language on top of a language for me, and when it errors I get really lost.

    If you’re just programming for yourself without the intent to submit it for a PR, you can just throw away the linter file. But I mentioned it was good to have in a project, because if there were multiple people working on it, all with their own style, the code can become a mess quite fast

    I get sick of something that annoys me and want to go in and fix the issue despite being completely unqualified, but naive enough to try.

    Well, I mean, that’s basically all the things right? You start completely unqualified, mess around for a while, and after a while you’re them more-qualified next time…

    With stuff like Marlin, I seem to like the hardware side of things.

    Just messing around with stuff you like is a good way to learn - though in my experience doing anything with hardware is way more difficult than just plain software. If you have to interface with hardware its very often pretty obscure stuff, like sending the correct hardware instructions to a driver, or to just “hardware pins” even… Like trying to start modifying a driver as a kind of starter project doesn’t sound like something I’d recommend