Arduino

5:20 AM

Kinda feel bad about pouncing on every question that I can answer

Then again, if those #$%@ moderators are allowed to do it on their sites, so can I ;-)

5:49 AM

@Manishearth Oh go for it. In the greater scheme of things, there'll be a good solid reference base for when the site goes public.

Manishearth

Yeah, I know :)

Just hope that it doesn't discourage others from answering

For example, with you it's OK, since you still participate heavily

but if this discourage someone who hasn't participates much and wants to, that's not good

However, on Robotics and Chem most of the topreps had answers everywhere in private beta

that didn't discourage more answers

So it probably should be OK

Anindo Ghosh

6:20 AM

@Manishearth It's OK, I would venture to say it's good. If there were not at least a handful of obsessive answer posters on the site, it would become too dependent on too few people. When those few are unwell/traveling/busy with work, the site would grind to a halt. I've found that the best instigator for new people to post, is seeing an answer they don't agree with.

Manishearth

Yep

Anindo Ghosh

@Manishearth But, on a related note: I think the policy some SEs take, of nagging people to not accept an answer for at least 24 hours, is worth emulating: Maybe we could even consider adding that to the FAQ. Once an answer is accepted, as long as said answer is not incorrect, I for one never post another answer even if I have a better or simpler solution. I am aware from EE chat that others are similar.

Manishearth

I wait before accepting as well

Anindo Ghosh

So the site loses out on innovative or out-of-the-box solutions.

Manishearth

But I do post answers to questions that are already accepted

but it may not be a good idea to add it to the FAQ

Anindo Ghosh

6:23 AM

@Manishearth That's you accepting on your questions - What I am suggesting is that the site make a strong push towards asking new people to not accept ever in less than 24 hours.

Manishearth

@AnindoGhosh i know what you mean :)

Anindo Ghosh

@Manishearth I do too, but only if I feel "what an idiotic answer!". Not if I feel "well, that would work, even if it's not the best".

Manishearth

Nah. If I have anything extra to add that is too ling to just urge the answerer to incorporate, I post

Anindo Ghosh

@Manishearth I just give backroom inputs (in chat) to the answerer. Why rock their boat with a counter-answer if they aren't actually wrong?

Manishearth

I don't look at it as a counter-answer, I look at it as something supplemental. It's not a contest ;-)

Anindo Ghosh

6:41 AM

@Manishearth You'd be amazed at the response certain high rep people have to additional answers - There have been so many nasty ego battles on EE, SO and EnglishLanguage that I've seen, some that I have been part of (regretfully) because someone posted what the original accepted answer poster though was an indictment of their answer...

@Manishearth Also for enhancing value of an SE to future researchers, there is merit to improving an existing answer (if it wasn't wrong) and resulting in one (or a few) really good answers, than to have a multitude, thus creating confusion to newbies.

Manishearth

6:58 AM

@AnindoGhosh If the answer is more or less the same, I understand the response, though I don't condone any rudeness involved. If the answer has a significant amount of new info, that's better

Anindo Ghosh

@Manishearth Agreed. Amount of delta to justify a new answer is an analog value not easily quantifiable. Therefore if the poster is open to back-room input, I'll just err on the side of peace and happiness (and laziness) :-)

AshRj

8:55 AM

@Manishearth You could just wait a few hours before answering. If nobody else answers, not really an issue.

Anindo Ghosh

9:33 AM

The latest question is more squarely fitting in EE.SE than in Arduino, it isn't really Arduino Due specific other than the capacitor sub-query. What are your views?

Manishearth

9:53 AM

@AnindoGhosh Yep, we should ask him to restructure his question. Ask para 1 on EE, make para 2 the main q

@AnindoGhosh I edited it out

Anindo Ghosh

10:09 AM

Excellent. I really want to avoid giving grounds for the "duplicate of EE.SE" argument towards closing Arduino.SE.

John

11:19 AM

Little off-topic if you don't mind, but does anyone see any questions on graphicdesign.stackexchange.com ?

This is what I see: i.imgur.com/gs1rGvx.png

:?

nevermind, it has resolved itself

AshRj

12:16 PM

@John That happens sometimes. Caching issues on the server, I think. Quite a few posts on MSO about it.

John

ah, thanks @AshRj

AshRj

12:37 PM

Is there anything that this is missing ?

1

A: How to use c++11?

Firstly, only gcc 4.7 and above (and therefore avr-gcc 4.7 and above) support C++11. So, check the versions installed with : gcc --version avr-gcc --version If avr-gcc is 4.7 or higher, then you may be able to use C++11. The Arduino IDE does not support custom compiler flags. This has been re...