Code Review - Discussion about help vs. review

rolfl

04:43

2

Q: Reviewing AI based on how it performs

On 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?

Simon André Forsberg

09:00

@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

I 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...

php security cryptography

5

Q: Add HTML to the page using a PHP Class

I 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...

php

13

Q: HTML tag encoder

library.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) { ...

php html

Also, what do you think of the question How can I make my code more modular?

Simon André Forsberg

12:43

And this question:

0

Q: Print all permutations of a given string in Java

I 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]; ...

java interview-questions

> My main question: is there more elegant/better solution? Can I avoid using this auxiliary array (I tried to but it didn't work)?

Vogel612

13:10

@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

Simon André Forsberg

13:47

@Vogel612 I think so too, but you never know with @rolfl

ckuhn203

So, here's my question fellas. What is it about design questions (with implementation) that hurt the site?

Simon André Forsberg

I wonder the same thing @ckuhn203

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.

Simon André Forsberg

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;

ckuhn203

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.

Simon André Forsberg

13:59

^^ Agreed

I see no reason in turning those questions away.

Vogel612

@SimonAndréForsberg isn't this kinda the newbie programmer 101 question??

more interesting would be possibly:

Simon André Forsberg

@Vogel612 Sure it is, but is it on or off-topic for CR?

Vogel612

@SimonAndréForsberg on. Definitely.

Simon André Forsberg

Exactly.

Vogel612

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.

ckuhn203

14:04

HMMMM

Vogel612

Is that one on or off?

Simon André Forsberg

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

Vogel612

was just about to ask ;)

btw, that //insert your code from above was a placeholder for your on-topic question.

Simon André Forsberg

Hmm... then it's not an IOQ anymore

It's a DFQ (Design First Question)

I'd say on-topic

Vogel612

I'd say off..

I'd suspect a larger application around that, and a brainless design.

Simon André Forsberg

14:10

@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?

Vogel612

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..

ckuhn203

@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.

Vogel612

@ckuhn203 given the case your review were accepted, you'd "invalidate" all other possible reviews..

ckuhn203

No. OP has the option to roll his own. I'm just telling him not to.

Vogel612

So the hassle @Heslacher went through to analyze the whole code, would be for naught.

ckuhn203

14:19

Honestly, I was going to go through that hassle as well, @Heslacher beat me to it.

Vogel612

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.

Simon André Forsberg

@Vogel612 It's called refactoring or rewriting and programmers do it all the time

ckuhn203

Or implementation is no longer necessary, but why is that a problem?

Vogel612

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

Simon André Forsberg

@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..

Vogel612

14:23

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.

Simon André Forsberg

And if it's helpful for OP, how is it not a useful answer for CR?

Vogel612

the problem is, that the rest of the code becomes "unreviewable" as soon as you got such a review.

and the question dies.

ckuhn203

That's not true at all.

OP may not choose to change the design.

Simon André Forsberg

^^ Exactly

All the code is still reviewable even if the design is wrong

ckuhn203

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

My 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...

strings vb.net

Simon André Forsberg

14:26

@ckuhn203 Stargreed

ckuhn203

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.

Vogel612

@ckuhn203 but the question got 3 close-votes as broken code now..

ckuhn203

That's beside the point @Vogel612.

Vogel612

@ckuhn203 is it?

ckuhn203

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.

Vogel612

14:30

hmm..

So you're saying as long as there's any non-example implementation of the design it's on-topic?

ckuhn203

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.

Simon André Forsberg

@ckuhn203 I totally agree.

Vogel612

@ckuhn203 so you'd allow design-only questions provided there's enough context?

ckuhn203

@Vogel612 Not exactly.

> Do you want feedback about any and all aspects of the code?

Vogel612

Sure, reviewing the design is okay in itself.

but asking about it isn't..

ckuhn203

14:37

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.

Vogel612

point taken.

Simon André Forsberg

@ckuhn203 Agreed!

Vogel612

the problem is, asking about it, often implies, that it isn't finished yet.

Simon André Forsberg

this.knownWords.add("asinine");

@Vogel612 It has been written. That's good enough for me.

ckuhn203

Me too @Simon.

btw, thanks @Santas.

But that's not why I linked to it.

Simon André Forsberg

14:41

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.".

Vogel612

@SimonAndréForsberg this.knownWords.get("asinine").getMeaning() returned null

Simon André Forsberg

@Vogel612 inane, mindless, vacuous

Vogel612

--> this.knownWords.refresh("asinine", "idiotic, inane, mindless, vacuous")

Simon André Forsberg

this.knownWords.add("vacuous"); this.knownWords.add("inane");

Vogel612

dem cross-referencings.

Simon André Forsberg

14:43

Thread.sleep((int) (Math.random() * 1000 * 60 * 60 * 24));
this.knownWords.forget("vacuous", "inane", "asinine");

Vogel612

instant translate offers: "moronic, rubbishy"

ckuhn203

Ohhhhh vacuous. I like that one.

I forgot about it.

Shouldn't forgetAll clear knownWords?

Vogel612

vacuous: "meaningless, empty, inexpressive" / "expressionless, inexpressive, emotionless" / "empty, blank, bare"

ckuhn203

You should change forgetAll to forget.

Wow. Knee jerk reaction.......

Vogel612

no it should be forgetAll

Simon André Forsberg

14:45

@ckuhn203 You just reviewed my design without me having implemented it.

ckuhn203

lol

Vogel612

because forget implies forget(T) while forgetAll implies forgetAll(Iterable<T>)

Simon André Forsberg

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.

Vogel612

what you probably meant was clear()

@SimonAndréForsberg happy to have a single overload that allows both:

Simon André Forsberg

It could be forgetMany but that sounds... unnecessary.

Vogel612

14:47

 void forget(T... words);

Simon André Forsberg

^^ Exactly

So, question of the day: Is this on or off topic?

1

Q: Shorten my asynchronous DB queries, using async.js module

I 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...

javascript node.js asynchronous async.js

@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

ckuhn203

........... 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

Vogel612

I'd also opt for example-code, maybe..

Simon André Forsberg

I honestly don't know. Which perhaps implies that it is indeed unclear what he's asking

Vogel612

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?"

Simon André Forsberg

14:55

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?

ckuhn203

But he goes rambling on about code not written yet.

Yeah. What Vogel said.

Vogel612

@SimonAndréForsberg you wanna tell him?

Simon André Forsberg

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.

Vogel612

@SimonAndréForsberg I'd have never formulated it that way, but I think in essence you are right..

Simon André Forsberg

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)

Vogel612

15:01

@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"

ckuhn203

Well, that's what I did, and I maintain that it was on topic.

But I'm admittedly not objective about that question.

Simon André Forsberg

@Vogel612 s/don't know/considering/ but I'd say on-topic

Vogel612

@ckuhn203 FWIW I agree with you concerning your question.

Simon André Forsberg

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.

Vogel612

but the way @SimonAndréForsberg put it I'd say it's Off...

Simon André Forsberg

15:04

@Vogel612 How did I put it? What are you exactly referring to?

Vogel612

> "I have decided on this for now, is it a good design? And here's the implementation to go along with it"

Simon André Forsberg

@Vogel612 What is off-topic about that?

is it because I say "for now"? i.e. implying that I'm open to change?

Vogel612

@SimonAndréForsberg no it's implying the code does not do what it's supposed to

Simon André Forsberg

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?

Vogel612

@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.

Simon André Forsberg

15:14

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.

ckuhn203

I would agree with that^.

Vogel612

@SimonAndréForsberg we're kinda at the point of what design is again..

Simon André Forsberg

@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?

rolfl

I think I have a different way to put things I think.

Simon André Forsberg

We need to design a good definition of design

Vogel612

15:20

@SimonAndréForsberg but how is method signatures part of the how then?

rolfl

(nothing like a night's sleep and a re-watch of "Gravity" to put things in perspective

Vogel612

@SimonAndréForsberg exactly

Simon André Forsberg

Well there's the monkey!

Vogel612

Class Structure I'm in, but that's mostly for the "data-representation"...

rolfl

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'?

Simon André Forsberg

15:21

@Vogel612 You still end up calculating probabilities in Minesweeper. You can still achieve the same results, only in different ways.

rolfl

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.

Vogel612

7. ??? 8. profit

Simon André Forsberg

@rolfl If you ask a DFQ the answer is "Yes" to all those questions

Vogel612

so the first is: blatantly OT

second is: Unclear

as well as third

rolfl

@SimonAndréForsberg DFQ is 'No' to 4.

Simon André Forsberg

15:23

@rolfl DFQ is 'Yes' to 4 but willing to change it

And there's nothing wrong with being open to change.

ckuhn203

That ^

rolfl

Agreed.

Vogel612

fifth is missing code and sixth is broken code..

rolfl

OK, I think this is progress.

Simon André Forsberg

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.".

rolfl

15:23

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.

ckuhn203

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.

rolfl

if the user wants to discuss the solution, but is willing to change the 'how', then it is on-topic.

ckuhn203

I think that's what we're all saying. Yes.

Simon André Forsberg

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.

rolfl

@SimonAndréForsberg Incorrect^^^

6

Q: Reviewing AI based on how it performs

On 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 ...

discussion asking-questions scope

Simon André Forsberg

15:25

@rolfl Please use "reply to message" for such markings (when there are new chat messages appearing all the time)

rolfl

'Is this a good way', is different to 'what is a good way'.

ckuhn203

@rolfl Absolutely. Agreed.

Vogel612

So in short:
Is this a good way? --> on
What is a good way? --> off

Simon André Forsberg

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?"

Vogel612

that's the second, at least IMO

rolfl

15:28

@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'.

Vogel612

the first would be more gimme-teh-codez

@rolfl what about "I am not happy with it, but I don't know how to do it better?"

rolfl

grey, but on-topic, because they are not "demanding" a different solution, but an improved version of the current.

Vogel612

Okay, with you there (though I'd put it less gray, maybe)

now where do the interface questions stand?

Simon André Forsberg

gimme-teh-codez 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 gimme-a-push-in-the-right-direction rather than gimme-teh-codez

Vogel612

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.

Simon André Forsberg

15:37

@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?

Vogel612

Well take my Data Layer for example.

Simon André Forsberg

@Vogel612 Are you saying that refactor is on-topic but rewrite is off-topic?

rolfl

IOQ is Implementation-only!!!!!

Vogel612

@SimonAndréForsberg exactly!

rolfl

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.

Simon André Forsberg

15:39

But answering with a rewrite is on-topic?

rolfl

requesting an opinion on how it was solved is on-topic.

Vogel612

@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.

rolfl

answering has very few restrictions.

Just because an answer reqrites the code (as long as it explains why the rewrite is 'better', is fine.

Simon André Forsberg

@Vogel612 Why would it be off-topic then?

rolfl

requesting a rewrite is off, giving a rewrite is on.

2

Vogel612

15:40

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"

rolfl

which is why I said, the first time, that design reviews are only on topic if the question did not ask for one!

Vogel612

The answer would be "try again", and then you're failing in question 3

Simon André Forsberg

@rolfl And requesting a better way to solve the problem if you have a feeling that your current code is non-optimal?

Vogel612

@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.

rolfl

Vogel, I disagree with that last one.

Simon André Forsberg

15:42

How is requesting a better way to solve the problem different from how can I rewrite this code?

Vogel612

hmmm..

rolfl

@Vogel612 wrong.

Vogel612

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.

rolfl

@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.

ckuhn203

That's an awful lot of awfully fine semantics...

Simon André Forsberg

15:47

I agree with @ckuhn203

rolfl

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?

Simon André Forsberg

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?

Vogel612

@rolfl Even if that means realizing: "I see that it should be possible to improve it, but I don't know how"

rolfl

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.

Vogel612

@rolfl isn't that the typical SO question???

Simon André Forsberg

15:50

@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.

ckuhn203

@rolfl Those questions are bad questions and should be downvoted, but that doesn't necessarily make them off topic.

2

Vogel612

@SimonAndréForsberg assume OP might have already asked an SO question and YADSOU had to do the FGITW and gave him the codez....

@ckuhn203 that.

rolfl

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

Vogel612

and see what happens?

rolfl

as DFQ's come through, we can discuss them, and see if we can find a line somewhere.

Vogel612

15:53

sounds like a plan..

rolfl

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.

Vogel612

@rolfl and we can still take care of it.

Simon André Forsberg

@Vogel612 YADSOU? Yet Another D.... Stack Overflow User?

rolfl

Yes. The 'safe' option is to allow them for now, and close the hole later, if needed.

Vogel612

@SimonAndréForsberg depends on the D... [sic. innuendo intended]

Simon André Forsberg

15:54

@rolfl Amen

2

ckuhn203

@rolfl Feel free to say so. I'm happy to eat my words when I'm wrong.

rolfl

I'll run this past @200 and @Jamal, and then make it so.

@ckuhn203 me too.

Vogel612

@rolfl I suggest you write a clear and new faq question on that.

rolfl

I think this chat room can be a decent forum for it.

Simon André Forsberg

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" ;)

Vogel612

15:55

possibly also a short "announcement" in the 2nd monitor?

rolfl

(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.

Vogel612

Enjoy ;)

@Vogel612 but yes I mean mentally impaired @SimonAndréForsberg

It's kinda unnerving to ping myself though..

Simon André Forsberg

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?

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.

rolfl

16:38

^^^ Good point, @Simon.

Also:

0

A: Reviewing AI based on how it performs

Your 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...

Simon André Forsberg

@rolfl Is it just me or does your meta answers get longer and longer?

rolfl

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.

Simon André Forsberg

@rolfl Oh dear... I understand the pain!

rolfl

17:18

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]

Simon André Forsberg

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?

rolfl

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

A 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...

discussion scope

2

Posted a meta question - one ring to rule them all.

rolfl

17:40

@SimonAndréForsberg - would you agree that the meta question accurately reflects the discussion?

Simon André Forsberg

18:16

@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.

:)

rolfl

It's a simple question: where is the line? ;-)

Simon André Forsberg

Here: ---------------------

200_success

18:52

@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.)

Simon André Forsberg

20:18

2

Q: Finding the Players with the highest score

Given 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...

java

> So this is pretty awkward... Is there a better way?

Perfectly on topic I'd say

rolfl

Agreed, because it is asking a yes-no question maybe?

Is there a better way, rather than what is the better way?

Simon André Forsberg

21:28

What if it was phrased as "I have a feeling I am doing it wrong, what is the better way?"

ckuhn203

22:18

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

nhgrif

23:38

@ckuhn203 This kind of goes back to my "Does the plain-English part even matter?"

Transcript for

Code Review - Discussion about help v…