Do all the things like ++ or -- rants, post your own rants, comment on others' rants and build your customized dev avatarSign Up
They should be fucking objective.
I like has nothing to do with reasoning in an PR.
My 2 pesos:
Always work to eliminate the word "but" from your writing; it stages conflict. Rephrase any statement containing but as a question whenever possible.
Before: "I don't like this, but I think we can make a change to it in post."
After: "do you have any objections to a follow-on task to make change x to y?"
I agree generally.
In my case it's not an issue, there's no heavy duty critical PR reviews, or of that kinda conflict where 'but' or such things leave you open to petty stuff. No risk of any of that stuff where I am.
If it was a more formal environment, I'd probably just go with the local flow.
I get the feeling a lot of other places are more formal ... or militant about PRs.
The word 'like' states a preference.
Coding wise - style preferences should be handled by an coding guideline.
Algorithms can be hard. There is no preference, there is a pro -/ contra.
Which need to be mentioned. A PR should be a fact based conversation.
Bonus points if you can be objective and nice.
Militant and too formal makes no fun.
But I started to hate the word "like" because usually someone tries to make the author adapt his way of coding.
A PR shouldn't do that. A PR should be neutral so both parties can learn from each other.