Programmer Humor

19623 readers

2 users here now

Welcome to Programmer Humor!

This is a place where you can post jokes, memes, humor, etc. related to programming!

For sharing awful code theres also Programming Horror.

Rules

Keep content in english
No advertisements
Posts must be related to programming or programmer topics

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

Feyter@programming.dev

anzo@programming.dev

BurningTurtle@programming.dev

pylapp@programming.dev

617

I realised this today (lemmy.world)

submitted 7 months ago by miridius@lemmy.world to c/programmer_humor@programming.dev

26 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] omidmnz@programming.dev 6 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Prefer --force-with-lease. It doesn't make a difference in this scenario, but it's a safer habit/default.

[–] xmunk@sh.itjust.works 3 points 7 months ago (1 children)

There is no reason to force push anymore - force with lease is always preferable. So said, a frequent rebaser.

[–] rufus@lemmy.sdf.org 4 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Wait what is the difference between the two?

[–] xmunk@sh.itjust.works 11 points 7 months ago

Force with lease will send up what your local thinks the most recent commit on the branch was and the host will reject the push if it knows of a more recent commit on that branch. Basically, it saves you from overwriting a commit you didn't realize existed.