Conversation started Oct 24, 2014 at 11:18.
Oct 24, 2014 11:18
Okay so you have language tags ()
Library tags
Problem tags
algorithm tags:
2
Those tag categories are good
but tags like or
which is like... a language construct tag?
it's a meta-tag
burn it
Are all language construct tags meta-tags?
not necessarily..
Oct 24, 2014 11:22
What does fit in
either (problem tag) or meta-tag imo..
Cause I think the idea that "my code has X so I should tag my question with it" is wrong
...
"My code..."
- Does X = problem-tag
- Is X = language-tag
- Uses X, which is part of the language = language-construct tag, burn it
- Uses X, which is not part of the language - library-tag
This looks like a good guideline,...
yeah but my list isn't exhaustive yet
algorithms are subset of problems, right?
what about ,
Oct 24, 2014 11:27
Here's my argument for .
Which I'll admit may get abused and may not be a good tag.
There are some questions where the question relates to "how can I pass less arguments?" Or "using an out param feels dirty. How can I avoid it?"
Are tags that say "I want the review to be about" okay?
In that case, we're not using because there are args in the question, but because the question is directly about them.
No. We burnt those.
I see where you're going.
*directly about them and how to use them properly.
So, @pimgd, you want to burn things like and because they're a language construct?
Maybe is too generic and you're looking for tags instead?
Oct 24, 2014 11:32
I find them a useful categorization if used correctly. But I'll agree that they may end up being problematic.
@RubberDuck I don't know yet.
That's why we hash these things out. =)
I wanna come up with categorization so you can easily say "well this tag needs to be X because it's in this category"
Those seem too specific to me.
and it might not be true all the time
but you can open the discussion with it
There's my question here...
2
Q: Case-insensitive String search in Array

PimgdWrote this function for a Stack Overflow answer. It started off pretty bad but in the end I polished it a bit and now I have something I think to be pretty clean. Actually, when I look at the code, this is what I usually write when I'm programming AS3 (minus the documentation, I'm a lazy bastard,...

It's about a single function meant as a library function
it has a loop... it has arguments... it has conditions...
yet I don't think I should tag them as such
Oct 24, 2014 11:35
@Pimgd I might try to write an answer for that bounty
So you tagged it
It is a good tag because...
it says what the question is about.
@Pimgd I find the a useful one.
@Pimgd those three tags are too limited. A question can only have 5 tags.
@SimonAndréForsberg good point.
@RubberDuck How many questions can you find in the next 30 minutes where that tag could fit?
Which one @Simon?
Oct 24, 2014 11:40
My question isn't actually about array usage
And none because I need to go to work! =P
So I guess the tag would have to go from my question
Then it shouldn't be tagged with array. Yeah. That ^
is it about search?...
Well yeah, that's the problem statement
> The problem the code attempts to solve is finding a case-insensitive string in an array.
Oct 24, 2014 11:43
Okay, so array & search seem appropriate to me.
why does array seem appropriate to you?
I don't know @Simon. I could find at least three in the next five minutes.
There are about 1000 candidate questions. Probably only 100 or so are tag worthy, but I could be way off on that estimate.
@pimgd it seems appropriate because the question is about searching an array.
Why is not appropriate for the question?
> A tag is a word or phrase that describes the topic of the question. Tags are a means of connecting experts with questions they will be able to answer by sorting questions into specific, well-defined categories.

Tags can also be used to help you identify questions that are interesting or relevant to you.
I don't know. Is it appropriate?
I don't really have time to think about it right now, but I smell a meta brewing.
A bookmark could be useful if there's a room owner about.
 
Conversation ended Oct 24, 2014 at 11:49.