• MercuryGenisus@lemmy.world
    5·
    4 months ago

    I would reject this pull request. Why is the indenting all over the place? Why is your keyword capitalisation all over the place? WHY YELLOW?!

    Edit: the more I look at this the more it pisses me off. Wtf is going on with your kerning? Just random number and placement of spaces. Also, why is the table name in caps? Who does that? Select * is lazy. Do you really need every field about a girl? Really? Worst of all, not a limited request. I sware this is just the kind of thing that would return 30 million rows and brick the database for twenty seconds.

    • somnuz@lemm.ee
      4·
      4 months ago

      You are now a Certified Rejector. Stay sharp, keep the wheel rolling.

    • Black616Angel@discuss.tchncs.de
      3·
      4 months ago

      You forgot some: Why is there no space after SELECT?

      Why are boyfriend and smallwaist not questions like is_cute and is_crazy? Either all boils are with a verb or none.

      Also why is smallwaist not in snake case? It should be small_waist (or better yet has_small_waist or even better waist = “small”)

      Also also boyfriend should be null not false, this would solve multiple issues.

      And finally the only positive thing is the * itself, because selecting only body would be even worse. 🤣

        • lennivelkant@discuss.tchncs.de
          2·
          4 months ago

          That’s (part of) why it should be a separate table to map the relation “Relationship”. People can have more than one (polyamory, infidelity), and you could track fields like the start, end, status (e.g. flirting, dating, committed, engaged, married, ended) in there.

  • barsquid@lemmy.world
    4·
    4 months ago

    One of the reasons women will find this repugnant is because they didn’t normalize their tables. Should be boyfriend_id is null.

    • JackbyDev@programming.devEnglish
      3·
      4 months ago

      Why is there a separate table for men and women in the first place? Shouldn’t there be a person table with a many to many relationship with itself (because polyamory exists)?

      • ResoluteCatnap@lemmy.mlEnglish
        1·
        4 months ago

        To that point a person table with a relationship table. So this way you can reference relationship between two or more persons within the relationship table and that could be joined to the person table if needed. I don’t think you’d really be able to keep it within one table while exploring multiple relationships unless you’re storing a list of ids that is interpreted outside of sql. Also a relationship table would allow exploring other types of relationships such as exes, love interests, coworkers, family, friends, etc

        • Thomrade@lemm.eeEnglish
          1·
          4 months ago

          Yeah it’d be a person table, and the relationship table indicating the ids of shipped couples. Do you think there’d need to be a status in the relationship table so we can tombstone exes? Or maybe started and ended date columns for each relationship so we can figure out whose cheating on who. But when about on-off relationships then? How would we model Ross and Rachel?

          • ResoluteCatnap@lemmy.mlEnglish
            1·
            4 months ago

            I think wed just need the following

            • rel.id (primary key)
            • rel.user_id (foreign key to person.id)
            • rel.user_id2 (foreign key to person.id)
            • rel.type (type of relationship)
            • rel.start (non null)
            • rel.end

            From there you don’t need a rel.status because you’re not updating this rel.id entry except for the rel.end. if they started dating again later it would be a whole new entry, and then you could query their entire dating history to see if they keep coming back to the same person, dating around, playing the field, etc. Separately there could be a friendship relationship that is tracked so you could if they ended being friends after a breakup.

    • Caveman@lemmy.world
      1·
      4 months ago

      That structure doesn’t handle polyamorous and cheating relationships very well. It should probably have and (select top 1 1 from dbo.relationships r where r.partner_a != GIRLS.id or r.partner_b != GIRLS.id) which would handle also LGBT+ relationships or relationships that are better represented as a graph.

    • qjkxbmwvz@startrek.website
      1·
      4 months ago

      Or, if you allow for polyamory and non-hetero relationships, you probably need a rel table (and some joins in the query).

      Maybe GIRLS is just a view…

  • Potatos_are_not_friends@lemmy.world
    2·
    4 months ago

    Gonna sound racist but deal with it.

    I constantly meet asian developers (Singapore , India, China, etc) with this edgelord personality. They come to American conferences and meetups, say some wild sexist shit, and someone has to politely let them know not to.

    Some backtrack. Some apologize. Some literally freeze up and pretend like it didn’t happen.

    • jol@discuss.tchncs.de
      2·
      4 months ago

      We do still live in a bubble in the west. We’re fighting for equity across genders and race, while some parts of the world are still questioning if sexual harassment against women at work is really that big of a deal.

    • Drew@sopuli.xyzOP
      1·
      4 months ago

      Many of my guy coworkers have been (and are) sort of misogynistic, and homophobic (I’m in India). It makes me really uncomfortable. Might start reporting people to HR one day.

      • drathvedro@lemm.ee
        1·
        4 months ago

        Just get to know HR first. They might be mysogynists themselves (even if they are female).

  • RobertoOberto@sh.itjust.works
    1·
    4 months ago

    Who says programmers don’t have a sense of humor?

    No one. It’s just what you pretend people say to make yourself feel like some kind of special exception.

  • simple@lemm.ee
    1·
    4 months ago

    I can already imagine a 40-something year old manager coming into work wearing this

      • fibojoly@sh.itjust.works
        0·
        4 months ago

        Uh, no no. The rule is “half my age plus seven”. I’ve no idea what your other term is supposed to represent.

        • ji17br@lemmy.ml
          1·
          4 months ago

          He’s saying it goes both ways. The upper limit is a women who you would be half her age plus 7.

      • lennivelkant@discuss.tchncs.de
        1·
        4 months ago

        Good point.

        Should be age > (@my_age / 2) +7

        FTFOP - now my age is some value defined outside the immediate query.

        More likely, the GIRLS would be a view of some table persons and you could query my_age from that table too.