Return to Question

In my first CR question, I was looking for feedback about my implementation of a graph data structure and an algorithm for depth first traversal, as I am studying these at the moment.

Although I appreciate many of the reviewers' comments, there seemed to be a focus on code that I deliberately put together quickly for the purpose of asking for review, as I would do on SO.

My question is this: when asking for review, should full code be included, or should we work code down to something simplified so the meat of what we are asking for can be looked at more thoroughly?

In my linked question, for example, I used a very basic hashing function that got torn to bits in the reviews (rightfully so); but my main question was regarding the implementation of the graph structure - should I have included a lengthier HashTable class, even though that wasn't what I was looking for review on?

In my first CR question, I was looking for feedback about my implementation of a graph data structure and an algorithm for depth first traversal, as I am studying these at the moment.

Although I appreciate many of the reviewers' comments, there seemed to be a focus on code that I deliberately put together quickly for the purpose of asking for review, as I would do on SO.

My question is this: when asking for review, should full code be included, or should we work code down to something simplified so the meat of what we are asking for can be looked at more thoroughly?

In my linked question, for example, I used a very basic hashing function that got torn to bits in the reviews (rightfully so); but my main question was regarding the implementation of the graph structure - should I have included a lengthier HashTable class, even though that wasn't what I was looking for review on?

In my first CR question, I was looking for feedback about my implementation of a graph data structure and an algorithm for depth first traversal, as I am studying these atm.

Although I appreciate many of the reviewers' comments, there seemed to be a focus on code that I deliberately put together quickly for the purpose of asking for review, as I would do on SO.

My question is this: when asking for review, should full code be included, or should we work code down to something simplified so the meat of what we are asking for can be looked at more thoroughly.

In my linked question, for example, I used a very basic hashing function that got tore to bits in the reviews (rightfully so); but my main question was regarding the implementation of the graph structure - should I have included a lengthier HashTable class, even though that wasn't what I was looking for review on?

In my first CR question, I was looking for feedback about my implementation of a graph data structure and an algorithm for depth first traversal, as I am studying these at the moment.

Although I appreciate many of the reviewers' comments, there seemed to be a focus on code that I deliberately put together quickly for the purpose of asking for review, as I would do on SO.

My question is this: when asking for review, should full code be included, or should we work code down to something simplified so the meat of what we are asking for can be looked at more thoroughly?

In my linked question, for example, I used a very basic hashing function that got torn to bits in the reviews (rightfully so); but my main question was regarding the implementation of the graph structure - should I have included a lengthier HashTable class, even though that wasn't what I was looking for review on?