« first day (4209 days earlier)      last day (103 days later) » 

00:20
REFRESH! There are 5415 unanswered questions (93.0134 answered)
 
3 hours later…
03:42
0
Q: Advice on decomplecting and decoupling my tic tac toe implementation

user284985I am hoping to find out what you think about my implementation of tic tac toe. It is complete and working as expected with many tests but the logic in the main module where I have the play-game main game loop is not great and I am looking for feedback on potential ways to improve my code. I will ...

 
2 hours later…
05:50
You wish a code review? Welcome to codereview.stackexchange.com3CxEZiVlQ 33 secs ago
 
3 hours later…
09:00
If I would do the code review, I would come to the exact same conclusion as the analyzer tool without knowing any context of what normalize() or rotate() do and whether they have side effects. I would prefer the second variant that you presented as workaround together with proper documentation. Coding is not only about legality, but also about readability and maintainability. — André 51 secs ago
09:26
Not to reproach you but as a matter of fact: this is a duplicate question. Which means, for Stack Overflow as library of answers, this question has no value and rather will be closed. If you want a review for your particular code, it should be asked on codereview.stackexchange.comYour Common Sense 15 secs ago
 
2 hours later…
11:26
possible answer invalidation by Alexander Ivanchenko on question by srilakshmikanthanp: codereview.stackexchange.com/posts/294204/revisions
possible answer invalidation by Alexander Ivanchenko on question by srilakshmikanthanp: codereview.stackexchange.com/posts/294204/revisions
possible answer invalidation by Alexander Ivanchenko on question by srilakshmikanthanp: codereview.stackexchange.com/posts/294204/revisions
@Duga The code remained untouched
After the question was posted, I requested expending the description of the code
And OP done this by adding inline comments (i.e. they were not originally there, in the first version of the question).
11:42
possible answer invalidation by Alexander Ivanchenko on question by srilakshmikanthanp: codereview.stackexchange.com/posts/294204/revisions
In my edit I moved a couple of such comments (which by NO means can be regarded as proper Doc comments) placed over some classes into the text-part of the question to improve readability (so the text part is a bit more descriptive)
possible answer invalidation by Alexander Ivanchenko on question by srilakshmikanthanp: codereview.stackexchange.com/posts/294204/revisions
 
1 hour later…
12:54
re. @TobySpeight's
> Down to just 7½% unanswered - well done all you zombie hunters!
I've been going a little batty on this, but I'm thrilled to say that according to the meme bank, I've woken up my first corpse
3
Can we rename the Revival badge as Zombie-killa?
@toolic SE probably won't allow us. If you want post a meta post and I'll escalate.
@Peilonrayz: Good one!
 
1 hour later…
14:27
1
Q: Get histogram of bytes in any set of files in C++14

coderoddeIntro For the sake of practice, I wrote this short program. It asks any set of file names and it produces the histogram of bytes in all specified files (computing the sum). Code #include <algorithm> #include <array> #include <cstdlib> #include <fstream> #include <iostream> #include <string> #incl...

15:00
@Reinderien Congrats.
15:23
You have posted in the wrong place. Please take your question to CodeReview. This forum is for code that does not work correctly. — freeflow 5 secs ago
15:53
@freeflow the question needs work before it's suited to Code Review. You could have pointed the asker at A guide to Code Review for Stack Overflow users, as some things are done differently over there - e.g. we need a good description of the purpose of the code to give context, and question titles should simply say what the code is for (the question is always, "How can I improve this?"). It's important that the code works correctly; include the unit tests if possible. — Toby Speight 33 secs ago
 
2 hours later…
18:10
Code reviews should be posted on Code Review. — Cow 8 secs ago
18:22
possible answer invalidation by Andrew Bailey on question by Andrew Bailey: codereview.stackexchange.com/posts/294362/revisions
possible answer invalidation by Andrew Bailey on question by Andrew Bailey: codereview.stackexchange.com/posts/294362/revisions
@Duga: rolled back edit and left a comment
possible answer invalidation by Andrew Bailey on question by Andrew Bailey: codereview.stackexchange.com/posts/294362/revisions
possible answer invalidation by Andrew Bailey on question by Andrew Bailey: codereview.stackexchange.com/posts/294362/revisions
possible answer invalidation by Andrew Bailey on question by Andrew Bailey: codereview.stackexchange.com/posts/294362/revisions
19:07
Monking
19:38
3 lines of code is not a code review. — brebs 37 secs ago
@Cow, the question needs work before it's suited to Code Review. You could have pointed the asker at A guide to Code Review for Stack Overflow users, as some things are done differently over there - e.g. we need a good description of the purpose of the code to give context, and question titles should simply say what the code is for (the question is always, "How can I improve this?"). It's important that the code works correctly; include the unit tests if possible. — Toby Speight 47 secs ago
 
2 hours later…
21:33
If you have working code that you're looking to have peer reviewed for improvement, your post belongs on Code Review, which was created specifically for that purpose. Please be sure to carefully review their help center pages before posting, as they have some specific requirements that must be met. — Ken White 29 secs ago
22:03
@Reinderien: Just happened to me again. I think for the 3rd time this year. Thanks for the meme link. I didn't know it was a thing.
22:33
Nice! np

« first day (4209 days earlier)      last day (103 days later) »