« first day (1 day earlier)      last day (58 days later) » 

4:43 AM
2
Q: Reviewing AI based on how it performs

syb0rgOn Code Golf is is common to see a king-of-the-hill question where you have to implement an AI based on the rules given in the question. So then I got to thinking - "If I developed an AI for one of these 'games', I could post it on Code Review to improve it!" But then I was wondering how an AI ...

@Simon ... look forward to seeing your answer on that one
How can I make it win... vs. Does it implement strategy X well?
 
 
4 hours later…
9:00 AM
@rolfl Answered that one. Now it will be interesting to see what you say about my answer.
Also, what do you think of these questions? (and their answers)
10
Q: Password hashing method

BANNAI am having some issue to use PHP5 password_hash() function. My server is not supporting it, so I am using a function to hash. Is this one secure? public function Pass_Hash ($password) { $blowfish_salt = bin2hex(openssl_random_pseudo_bytes(22)); $hash = md5(crypt($password, "X1;G^C...

5
Q: Add HTML to the page using a PHP Class

ForebaI was trying to make my life easier making a class or something that would create HTML tags in a faster way. I ended up with something that I wouldn't consider the best practice. Take a look: /** * Add HTML to the page * * Add HTML to the page based on arrays with the tag names. It's gonna op...

13
Q: HTML tag encoder

John Isaiah Carmonalibrary.php My own HTML tag encoder that will print HTML codes according to the input. <?php function tag($tagname, $content = NULL, array $properties = NULL) { $html = "<$tagname"; if (!($properties === NULL)) foreach ($properties as $name => $value) { ...

Also, what do you think of the question How can I make my code more modular?
 
 
4 hours later…
12:43 PM
And this question:
0
Q: Print all permutations of a given string in Java

user3371223I want to print all permutations of a given string in Java. To do this I create one auxiliary array boolean used[] to check if I have used some character or not. This is my solution: private static void permute(String s) { int n = s.length(); boolean[] used = new boolean[n]; ...

> My main question: is there more elegant/better solution? Can I avoid using this auxiliary array (I tried to but it didn't work)?
 
1:10 PM
@SimonAndréForsberg that's a how question..
and I hope these are on-topic...
because it's intrinsically asking: "How can I make my code have a skinnier ass?"
Which encourages a "That and this make your code's ass look fat, you can make it skinnier by doing ..."
and that's imo one of the biggest points of a CodeReview.
2
 
1:47 PM
@Vogel612 I think so too, but you never know with @rolfl
 
So, here's my question fellas. What is it about design questions (with implementation) that hurt the site?
 
I wonder the same thing @ckuhn203
 
I mean, we stopped debating about what's on and off topic a long time ago. We've been talking about what should be on and off topic, so we need to define the harm or benefit such questions have.
 
How about this example question?

Hi have written this code but I feel that it makes my ass look fat, how can I make my ass skinny?

name1 = "Monkey";
name2 = "Simon";
name3 = "ckuhn";
name4 = "Vogel";
if (random == 1) return name1;
if (random == 2) return name2;
if (random == 3) return name3;
if (random == 4) return name4;
 
I think if we start turning those questions away, people might as well just go to Stack Overflow and there's no reason for this site to exist.
 
1:59 PM
^^ Agreed
I see no reason in turning those questions away.
 
@SimonAndréForsberg isn't this kinda the newbie programmer 101 question??
more interesting would be possibly:
 
@Vogel612 Sure it is, but is it on or off-topic for CR?
 
@SimonAndréForsberg on. Definitely.
 
Hi I need to write some code, that's supposed to randomly return a username. Does my design look nice that way?
interface UserPicker { String pick() }
class MyUserPicker implements UserPicker{
    @Override
    public String pick() {
        //insert your code from above here
    }
}
and we're already talking differnt.
 
2:04 PM
HMMMM
 
Is that one on or off?
 
Yeah that one I can agree with is off-topic. That's an IOQ, and although I have been arguing that such a question can be on-topic (such as yours), I would say that one would be off-topic.
IOQ = Interface Only Question
 
was just about to ask ;)
btw, that //insert your code from above was a placeholder for your on-topic question.
 
Hmm... then it's not an IOQ anymore
It's a DFQ (Design First Question)
I'd say on-topic
 
I'd say off..
I'd suspect a larger application around that, and a brainless design.
 
2:10 PM
@Vogel612 What do you mean? Are you saying that "reviewing design" (Answering the question "Does my design look nice?") is only on-topic for larger applications?
 
No I'm saying "Your design is crap go back to the design board" is not a useful answer for CR..
and as the question can only garner a non-useful answer (for the site) it's off-topic
or rather. It's too opinionated here.
You could criticise about everything: return type, missing methods, retarded choice of solution, and that all makes the implemented code close to worthless.
OTOH, if It were "I got following interface from my Senior Application Designer [..]" It'd be different.
because the Design is "fixed" then..
Sure it can be criticised, but It doesn't break the legitimity of the implementation if you do.
I think that's also the point @rolfl was trying to make in his answer..
 
@Vogel612 I disagree with that statement. codereview.stackexchange.com/a/60570/41243
Granted, you should go on to review the code that is presented as well though.
 
@ckuhn203 given the case your review were accepted, you'd "invalidate" all other possible reviews..
 
No. OP has the option to roll his own. I'm just telling him not to.
 
So the hassle @Heslacher went through to analyze the whole code, would be for naught.
 
2:19 PM
Honestly, I was going to go through that hassle as well, @Heslacher beat me to it.
 
lol...
the problem is, that as soon as the design radically changes, the current implementation becomes kinda moot.
I had that in my project in a smaller fashion..
All our Controllers were @SessionScoped.
 
@Vogel612 It's called refactoring or rewriting and programmers do it all the time
 
Or implementation is no longer necessary, but why is that a problem?
 
And we designed them around that fact. They were doing loads of stuff
especially with other controllers.
Then we changed the design, to make the Controllers @RequestScoped.
and we were able to throw away almost half of the controllers' code..
Any review that would have happened on the code dropped, had become moot...
@SimonAndréForsberg refactoring (IMO) changing the code to be more readable and structured, while preserving how and what it does as close as possible
 
@Vogel612 But if a reviewer had said "Your design is crap go back to the drawing board and use @RequestScoped instead", how would that not have been helpful?
12 mins ago, by Vogel612
No I'm saying "Your design is crap go back to the design board" is not a useful answer for CR..
 
2:23 PM
rewriting (IMO): write new code to do what the code was originally intended to do.
@SimonAndréForsberg It's helpful for OP, sure
nobody challenged the helpfulness of design-reviews.
 
And if it's helpful for OP, how is it not a useful answer for CR?
 
the problem is, that the rest of the code becomes "unreviewable" as soon as you got such a review.
and the question dies.
 
That's not true at all.
OP may not choose to change the design.
 
^^ Exactly
All the code is still reviewable even if the design is wrong
 
And, even if OP does, there's still something to be learned from reviewing the rest of the code.
Here. Someone else trashed the design, but I reviewed it anyway.
1
Q: Adding string binary numbers

LOsunGMy requirement is to add two binary numbers, say "1001" and "0101" as binary1 and binary2. Partial Class Default2 Inherits System.Web.UI.Page Dim carry As Boolean = False ' Boolean variable to hold the carry if occured Protected Sub Button1_Click(sender As Object, e As System.EventAr...

 
2:26 PM
@ckuhn203 Stargreed
 
So. I'll ask again. What harm does reviewing design do? Because it's one way or the other. Either we can ask about our implemented design, or we can't and it's also off topic to mention it in an answer.
We can't have our cake and eat it too.
 
@ckuhn203 but the question got 3 close-votes as broken code now..
 
That's beside the point @Vogel612.
 
@ckuhn203 is it?
 
It is broken and I'm pretty sure I cast a close vote on it too.
Yes. It is. We're not talking about broken code.
We're talking about the usefullness of reviewing the design.
 
2:30 PM
hmm..
So you're saying as long as there's any non-example implementation of the design it's on-topic?
 
I think so... it feels silly to say that we can review the design, but not ask about our design.
Provided that we've implemented it.
 
@ckuhn203 I totally agree.
 
@ckuhn203 so you'd allow design-only questions provided there's enough context?
 
@Vogel612 Not exactly.
> Do you want feedback about any and all aspects of the code?
 
Sure, reviewing the design is okay in itself.
but asking about it isn't..
 
2:37 PM
Yeah.... that's my issue.
Asking about design before it's been designed is not a good fit here, but I see nothing wrong with asking about it after it's been implemented.
Mostly because it's asinine that I can review it in an answer, but can't ask about it in my question.
 
point taken.
 
@ckuhn203 Agreed!
 
the problem is, asking about it, often implies, that it isn't finished yet.
 
this.knownWords.add("asinine");
@Vogel612 It has been written. That's good enough for me.
 
Me too @Simon.
btw, thanks @Santas.
But that's not why I linked to it.
 
2:41 PM
Not all things that are up for review has to be "finished". In fact, if things ever was finished then the whole point of this site would be gone. "Sorry, there's no point in reviewing your code, it's finished already because you put it up for review. We can only review code that is finished.".
 
@SimonAndréForsberg this.knownWords.get("asinine").getMeaning() returned null
 
@Vogel612 inane, mindless, vacuous
 
--> this.knownWords.refresh("asinine", "idiotic, inane, mindless, vacuous")
 
this.knownWords.add("vacuous"); this.knownWords.add("inane");
 
dem cross-referencings.
 
2:43 PM
Thread.sleep((int) (Math.random() * 1000 * 60 * 60 * 24));
this.knownWords.forget("vacuous", "inane", "asinine");
 
instant translate offers: "moronic, rubbishy"
 
Ohhhhh vacuous. I like that one.
I forgot about it.
Shouldn't forgetAll clear knownWords?
 
vacuous: "meaningless, empty, inexpressive" / "expressionless, inexpressive, emotionless" / "empty, blank, bare"
 
You should change forgetAll to forget.
Wow. Knee jerk reaction.......
 
no it should be forgetAll
 
2:45 PM
@ckuhn203 You just reviewed my design without me having implemented it.
 
lol
 
because forget implies forget(T) while forgetAll implies forgetAll(Iterable<T>)
 
forgetAll does sound like a method that doesn't take any arguments. Simply forget is better here. It describes the purpose of the method well.
 
what you probably meant was clear()
@SimonAndréForsberg happy to have a single overload that allows both:
 
It could be forgetMany but that sounds... unnecessary.
 
2:47 PM
 void forget(T... words);
 
^^ Exactly
So, question of the day: Is this on or off topic?
1
Q: Shorten my asynchronous DB queries, using async.js module

Waldo JeffersI am using Node.js Express.js node-mysql.js async.js I am making multiple asynchronous queries to my DB, but every query relies on the previous one's results, so I decided to use the waterfall method. But I found my code a bit messy, especially the function(cb) { ... } wraps. How could this...

@SimonAndréForsberg : Ok I understand. I first hesitated, because I thought it was too specific, but then found out that async.js existed, with only one question so... But anyway, thanks for the welcome ! Sorry about that, I would like to know what's the cleanest way to do what I'm trying to do using the async.js module. What methods (apply, waterfall...) or structure should I use ? Is that more clear ? Do you think I should edit my question ? — Waldo Jeffers 9 mins ago
 
........... Unclear what he's asking?
It certainly lost me and doesn't seem to be looking for a review.
@SimonAndréForsberg : Ok I understand. I first hesitated, because I thought it was too specific, but then found out that async.js existed, with only one question so... But anyway, thanks for the welcome ! Sorry about that, I would like to know what's the cleanest way to do what I'm trying to do using the async.js module. What methods (apply, waterfall...) or structure should I use ? Is that more clear ? Do you think I should edit my question ? — Waldo Jeffers 11 mins ago
 
I'd also opt for example-code, maybe..
 
I honestly don't know. Which perhaps implies that it is indeed unclear what he's asking
 
but I don't know enough node.js
Looks quite unclear to me. or even code not yet written.
"help me implement xy in the cleanest way"
and not "I implemnted xy like this, is this the cleanest way?"
 
2:55 PM
The first part sounds on-topic though:
> I am making multiple asynchronous queries to my DB, but every query relies on the previous one's results, so I decided to use the waterfall method. But I found my code a bit messy, especially the function(cb) { ... } wraps.

How could this code be improved?
 
But he goes rambling on about code not written yet.
Yeah. What Vogel said.
 
@SimonAndréForsberg you wanna tell him?
 
I would recommend editing your question and focusing more on "How could this code be improved?" and less on "How would you do it?". It sounds a bit like you want others to come up with a completely new solution from scratch for you. — Simon André Forsberg 28 secs ago
I was about to add this to my comment, but I'm not sure about if it's correct or not:
> It sounds a bit like you are asking others to decide things for you, and we can't really do that. We can comment on things that you have already decided though.
 
@SimonAndréForsberg I'd have never formulated it that way, but I think in essence you are right..
 
Note that DFQ's are more of the form "I have decided on this for now, is it a good design? And here's the implementation to go along with it" (design = method signatures and class structure)
 
3:01 PM
@SimonAndréForsberg what about "I have decided on this and implemented like ... But I don't know whether I should have actually done that, or something else entirely"
 
Well, that's what I did, and I maintain that it was on topic.
But I'm admittedly not objective about that question.
 
@Vogel612 s/don't know/considering/ but I'd say on-topic
 
@ckuhn203 FWIW I agree with you concerning your question.
 
You did something. You have code. The code works. You are considering other alternatives so you've almost self-reviewed it already but you want to know whether or not people agree with your self-review.
 
but the way @SimonAndréForsberg put it I'd say it's Off...
 
3:04 PM
@Vogel612 How did I put it? What are you exactly referring to?
 
> "I have decided on this for now, is it a good design? And here's the implementation to go along with it"
 
@Vogel612 What is off-topic about that?
is it because I say "for now"? i.e. implying that I'm open to change?
 
@SimonAndréForsberg no it's implying the code does not do what it's supposed to
 
Of course the code does what it's supposed to!
design = method signatures, class signatures (and probably some other stuff)
I am calculating probabilities in Minesweeper, this is the code.... What do you think of my design?
 
@SimonAndréForsberg no you asked:
I need to calculate probabilities in minesweeper. Is my design that I used as interim good? By the way this is how I actually do it.
 
3:14 PM
The code is calculating Minesweeper probabilities, but if in my code I have only a method "getProbabilityFor(Field xx)" or if I have a significantly more sophisticated interface, I am still calculating probabilities in Minesweeper.
The method signatures are part of the how, not the what.
 
I would agree with that^.
 
@SimonAndréForsberg we're kinda at the point of what design is again..
 
@Vogel612 Then we really need to figure that out once and for all. I say "design = method signatures and class structure", what would you say?
 
I think I have a different way to put things I think.
 
We need to design a good definition of design
 
3:20 PM
@SimonAndréForsberg but how is method signatures part of the how then?
 
(nothing like a night's sleep and a re-watch of "Gravity" to put things in perspective
 
@SimonAndréForsberg exactly
 
Well there's the monkey!
 
Class Structure I'm in, but that's mostly for the "data-representation"...
 
OK, The way I see it, is that a program goes through a 'life cycle'.
1. Do I need a program
2. do I know what I want it to do?
3. do I know how to define the 'problem'?
4. do I know how I would solve the 'problem'?
 
3:21 PM
@Vogel612 You still end up calculating probabilities in Minesweeper. You can still achieve the same results, only in different ways.
 
5. have I writtent the code to solve the problem?
6. does it work?
......
if the answer is no to any of those questions, then you are not ready for review.
 
7. ??? 8. profit
 
@rolfl If you ask a DFQ the answer is "Yes" to all those questions
 
so the first is: blatantly OT
second is: Unclear
as well as third
 
@SimonAndréForsberg DFQ is 'No' to 4.
 
3:23 PM
@rolfl DFQ is 'Yes' to 4 but willing to change it
And there's nothing wrong with being open to change.
 
That ^
 
Agreed.
 
fifth is missing code and sixth is broken code..
 
OK, I think this is progress.
 
42 mins ago, by Simon André Forsberg
Not all things that are up for review has to be "finished". In fact, if things ever was finished then the whole point of this site would be gone. "Sorry, there's no point in reviewing your code, it's finished already because you put it up for review. We can only review code that is finished.".
 
3:23 PM
OK, so I think the issue is question 4.
If the user/asker wants to 'discuss' how to solve it, then it is off topic.
 
46 mins ago, by ckuhn203
Asking about design before it's been designed is not a good fit here, but I see nothing wrong with asking about it after it's been implemented.
 
if the user wants to discuss the solution, but is willing to change the 'how', then it is on-topic.
 
I think that's what we're all saying. Yes.
 
If your answer is 'No' to question 4 then you would not have been able to proceed to 5.
@rolfl Disagreed. "Is this a good way of solving this problem?" is a common question around here and should remain on-topic.
 
@SimonAndréForsberg Incorrect^^^
6
Q: Reviewing AI based on how it performs

syb0rgOn Code Golf is is common to see a king-of-the-hill question where you have to implement an AI based on the rules given in the question. So then I got to thinking - "If I developed an AI for one of these 'games', I could post it on Code Review to improve it!" But then I was wondering how an AI ...

 
3:25 PM
@rolfl Please use "reply to message" for such markings (when there are new chat messages appearing all the time)
 
'Is this a good way', is different to 'what is a good way'.
 
@rolfl Absolutely. Agreed.
 
So in short:
Is this a good way? --> on
What is a good way? --> off
 
What is the difference between chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/17247085#17247085 and chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/17247090#17247090 ? (assuming code has been written to solve it in the first one)
What about "Here's what I did, is there a better way?"
 
that's the second, at least IMO
 
3:28 PM
@SimonAndréForsberg In my mind, the difference is that in the first instance, the user is asking 'gimme the code', but the second is asking 'I'm moslty happy with the code, but feel free to say it is crap and there is a better way'.
 
the first would be more
@rolfl what about "I am not happy with it, but I don't know how to do it better?"
 
grey, but on-topic, because they are not "demanding" a different solution, but an improved version of the current.
 
Okay, with you there (though I'd put it less gray, maybe)
now where do the interface questions stand?
 
is not as applicable when there is already an existing version of the code that solves the same problem. Asking for a different solution when an existing solution already exists is not off-topic IMO, and is more rather than
 
and can we even put interface question in either "is this" or "what is"?
@SimonAndréForsberg I think here's again where the difference between refactor and rewrite comes in.
I think questions that are clear to prompt a full rewrite of multiple methods should be out here.
The only valid answer to such questions is: It's crap, try again :(
All else would be "too broad" imo.
 
3:37 PM
@Vogel612 I think we'll have to wait a bit about the DOQs (Design Only, i.e. purely interface)
@Vogel612 Can you write up an example question?
 
Well take my Data Layer for example.
 
@Vogel612 Are you saying that refactor is on-topic but rewrite is off-topic?
 
IOQ is Implementation-only!!!!!
 
@SimonAndréForsberg exactly!
 
IFQ is interface question ;-)
requesting a rewrite is off-topic.
requesting a review is on topic.
requesting an opinion about how to solve the problem is off-topic.
 
3:39 PM
But answering with a rewrite is on-topic?
 
requesting an opinion on how it was solved is on-topic.
 
@Vogel612 If I had added an implementation that makes obvious that my whole data-layer would be better off written from scratch, then it'd be off-topic.
 
answering has very few restrictions.
Just because an answer reqrites the code (as long as it explains why the rewrite is 'better', is fine.
 
@Vogel612 Why would it be off-topic then?
 
requesting a rewrite is off, giving a rewrite is on.
2
 
3:40 PM
One of these: "I got 25 classes that all follow this structure and differ in about 25 LoC overall, how can I make it better"
 
which is why I said, the first time, that design reviews are only on topic if the question did not ask for one!
 
The answer would be "try again", and then you're failing in question 3
 
@rolfl And requesting a better way to solve the problem if you have a feeling that your current code is non-optimal?
 
@SimonAndréForsberg as mentioned above, grey but on.
9 mins ago, by rolfl
grey, but on-topic, because they are not "demanding" a different solution, but an improved version of the current.
Or rather, depends on the formulation.
 
Vogel, I disagree with that last one.
 
3:42 PM
How is requesting a better way to solve the problem different from how can I rewrite this code?
 
hmmm..
 
@Vogel612 wrong.
 
okay so this is one of these "I don't know where the line is, but I know when it's crossed"?
then my crossing point is somewhere other than yours.
 
@SimonAndréForsberg If it was put: I have this solution, can it be impoved with a specific focus on performance?
> And requesting a better way to solve the problem if you have a feeling that your current code is non-optimal?
saying can my code be faster? on topic.
saying I've tried, and I know it is slow, and I think it needs to be solved a different way, what do you think that way should be? is off-topic.
 
That's an awful lot of awfully fine semantics...
 
3:47 PM
I agree with @ckuhn203
 
The problem I am trying to solve with this whole discussion, is that: code coming to code review should be presented/delivered in a manner that is as close to the asker's capabilities as possible.
I have tried my hardest, this is the best I can do, how do I take it to the next step?
 
What is the point in closing a question, forcing the OP to edit only the pure-english question (i.e. not the context, only edit the thing that is being asked), and then re-opening the question?
 
@rolfl Even if that means realizing: "I see that it should be possible to improve it, but I don't know how"
 
I worry that saying people can come to Code Review and basically say: I have been lazy at solving this problem, I want you to solve it for me.
 
@rolfl isn't that the typical SO question???
 
3:50 PM
@rolfl If they have managed to write working code that already solves the problem, they're probably not that lazy. They probably want to solve the problem themselves.
 
@rolfl Those questions are bad questions and should be downvoted, but that doesn't necessarily make them off topic.
2
 
@SimonAndréForsberg assume OP might have already asked an SO question and YADSOU had to do the FGITW and gave him the codez....
@ckuhn203 that.
 
At this point in the discussion, I think the right thing (as a moderator) to do is:
- let's declare that DFQ's are temporarily on topic
 
and see what happens?
 
as DFQ's come through, we can discuss them, and see if we can find a line somewhere.
 
3:53 PM
sounds like a plan..
 
Maybe the problems I see are not going to materialize.
if they do materialize, I can say "told you so.... ;-)".
if they don't, you can do that to me.
 
@rolfl and we can still take care of it.
 
@Vogel612 YADSOU? Yet Another D.... Stack Overflow User?
 
Yes. The 'safe' option is to allow them for now, and close the hole later, if needed.
 
@SimonAndréForsberg depends on the D... [sic. innuendo intended]
 
3:54 PM
@rolfl Amen
2
 
@rolfl Feel free to say so. I'm happy to eat my words when I'm wrong.
 
I'll run this past @200 and @Jamal, and then make it so.
@ckuhn203 me too.
 
@rolfl I suggest you write a clear and new faq question on that.
 
I think this chat room can be a decent forum for it.
 
I can agree though that DOQs can be off-topic for now. If a good one comes along, perhaps I'll try to say "I told you so" ;)
 
3:55 PM
possibly also a short "announcement" in the 2nd monitor?
 
(the discussions of questions as they come along)
sure. There is no particular rush on this now, so I may actually do some work first.
 
Enjoy ;)
@Vogel612 but yes I mean mentally impaired @SimonAndréForsberg
It's kinda unnerving to ping myself though..
 
lol ^^
By the way, 93 seconds to solve a Minesweeper board is incredibly slow... — Simon André Forsberg 26 secs ago
And oh, @rolfl, one thing in this previous meta-answer of mine:
14
A: Can we review spreadsheet formulas?

Simon André Forsberg Actually, it's not even asking for a review in my opinion. It seems to be directly asking for an alternative, which makes me think that it's SO territory. It is actually asking for "Is there any better way to do this?" which to my eyes is nowhere near "gimme-the-codez". Let's take a look at...

> There's nothing wrong with giving the OP the code when code is already shown that does the same thing.
 
4:38 PM
^^^ Good point, @Simon.
Also:
0
A: Reviewing AI based on how it performs

rolflYour prototype question: See, it's great to have my software run fast, not have any bugs, conform to the standards, etc. But when it is all said and done, I really just want my AI to outperform the other AIs. has two parts - how do I write an AI that is a winning AI? Is my current AI a go...

 
@rolfl Is it just me or does your meta answers get longer and longer?
 
not just you.
One day I will get involved in 'easy' discussions.
3
also, my parents (especially my mother) is staying with us at the moment, and it makes me irritable, and pedantic... everything has to be discussed, and opined on...
And I am using it as another way to formulate my thoughts.
dubber rucking.
 
@rolfl Oh dear... I understand the pain!
 
5:18 PM
room topic changed to Code Review - Discussion about help vs. review: Imported from a comment discussion on meta.codereview.stackexchange.com/questions/2308/… [discussion] [scope]
 
It is strange @rolfl, I can't remember that we have disagreed so much about other things in the past.... Why do we disagree so much now suddenly?
 
First world problems .... ;-)
We actually agree on a whole bunch, but now that we know each other, and the system better, we are finding those very small marginal areas to discuss.
0
Q: Code Review vs. Help me solve my problem

rolflA question that asks: I don't know how to best solve problem X, can you suggest a way? ... is clearly off-topic on Code Review. A question that asks: I have solved problem X, and this is how I did it. Is it a good solution? ... is clearly on-topic on Code Review. There is a grey are...

2
Posted a meta question - one ring to rule them all.
 
5:40 PM
@SimonAndréForsberg - would you agree that the meta question accurately reflects the discussion?
 
6:16 PM
@rolfl I think it does, yes.
Although it is tempting to VTC:
> There are either too many possible answers, or good answers would be too long for this format. Please add details to narrow the answer set or to isolate an issue that can be answered in a few paragraphs.
:)
 
It's a simple question: where is the line? ;-)
 
Here: ---------------------
 
6:52 PM
@rolfl There has been a lot of good discussion lately, and I haven't fully absorbed all of it yet. I'll read it all over again and proceed cautiously. (Probably not today — busy at work.)
 
 
1 hour later…
8:18 PM
2
Q: Finding the Players with the highest score

janosGiven a list of Players with score, I want to find the ones with the highest score. There can be multiple players with the same score. I'm doing it like this now: class Player { final String name; final int score; Player(String name, int score) { this.name = name; th...

> So this is pretty awkward... Is there a better way?
Perfectly on topic I'd say
 
Agreed, because it is asking a yes-no question maybe?
Is there a better way, rather than what is the better way?
 
 
1 hour later…
9:28 PM
What if it was phrased as "I have a feeling I am doing it wrong, what is the better way?"
 
10:18 PM
That's really splitting hairs. I don't see the real difference. In that case OP means the same thing. Soooo, if that's really a problem, edit it so that it's on topic.
 
vnp
When reviewing code at work I am supposed to point to better ways of doing things. In some sense a question of better way is always present, even when it is not explicitly asked. The line I guess is in the code itself.
2
 
 
1 hour later…
11:38 PM
@ckuhn203 This kind of goes back to my "Does the plain-English part even matter?"
 

« first day (1 day earlier)      last day (58 days later) »