Re: [boost] codepad code longevity ?

Subject: Re: [boost] codepad code longevity ?
From: Dean Michael Berris (mikhailberis_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-01-29 20:45:15

On Sat, Jan 30, 2010 at 9:36 AM, OvermindDL1 <overminddl1_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 6:32 PM, Dean Michael Berris
> <mikhailberis_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>>> If you want to post to many NGs, you can always cross post.
>>> If you want your post accessible somewhere else (e.g. blog), you
>>> can always give a link to your post, just like I've done a while
>>> ago with the links to the Spirit discussions. It doesn't make sense
>>> to link to the code anyway without the context surrounding it.
>>>
>>
>> Well, now that you mention it you can embed the gist snippet using
>> HTML+JavaScript. :D
>
> You can embed gist snippets in an email text post? Â That would be a
> new one on me. Â ;-)
>

LOL. :D I meant if you were putting it in a blog post or something like that. ;)

>
> On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 6:32 PM, Dean Michael Berris
> <mikhailberis_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> The only point I was making is that Github gists is an alternative
>> means of doing it. Of course if the code fits in an email and is worth
>> inlining, then that's alright I guess.
>
> Not asking about alternates, rather asking *NOT* to do it at all
> actually. Â Inline if short enough, or attach it as a full compilable
> example.
>

So what would the consequence be for people who do post links to gists
or codepad-like services? :D

Anyway, I think if it's longevity of stuff on codepad is the problem,
then not using codepad is one solution. Inlining and attachments are
fine until you run into the attachment limit problem.

I guess what I'm saying is "discouraging" someone from doing it is
different from "banning" it. Unless there's a way for automatic
transparent enforcement of that, I'm not really seeing the benefit.

>
> On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 6:32 PM, Dean Michael Berris
> <mikhailberis_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> It only breaks down if you have more than a manageable number of lines
>> of code to be considered "email friendly".
>
> Hence the "or attach it" bit.
>

Yup.

>
> On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 6:32 PM, Dean Michael Berris
> <mikhailberis_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> If the concern was longevity, as long as the user's github account is
>> active and the gist has not been deleted, then it's just like anything
>> else out there that's accessible via a link. :)
>
> Not just longevity, but also searchability, remember, everything here
> is archived, it needs to all be searchable *in-context*. Â Links
> elsewhere, whether codepad or anything else awful like that, like
> gist, harm that in a number of ways.

Alright, I get the point.

However I don't agree that it's as evil as it's being called out to
be. It's the same problem when using tinyurl or bit.ly or even just
"natural" link rot -- I don't see how it's a huge downside. If there's
a downside like SEO friendliness, I think it's marginal enough to be
acceptable.

Just my thoughts though, not intending to represent others' ideas or
positions. :)

-- 
Dean Michael Berris
cplusplus-soup.com | twitter.com/deanberris
linkedin.com/in/mikhailberis | facebook.com/dean.berris | deanberris.com