0
\$\begingroup\$

In this question here I made a modification to a program:

Nintendo Nightmare [any%] Speedrun Bot (17:37)

Am I required to include the entire program’s source as part of the code to be reviewed? Furthermore, how do we include all the code in a large project? Do we have to attach the files somehow as renamed images? I’m not certain how to go about that.

\$\endgroup\$
4
\$\begingroup\$

I think you've missed a lot of context from your question, which can be found in chat.

Lack of response to your question

Should I close this question? Based on the lack of response, I am concluding it is off topic. Is that accurate?
Nintendo Nightmare [any%] Speedrun Bot (17:37)
https://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/57551595#57551595

If your question were off-topic you'd have gotten a response saying your post is off-topic. Since you haven't and 125 people have viewed your post I think, without even looking at the question, your question is not off-topic.

I've gone on to read and edit your question. I've removed a lot of not great content. For example labelling your code as an AI or bot isn't that important to getting your code reviewed. I've attempted to fix the easier problems with your question but I think problems still remain.

  1. I become bored halfway through your description.
    Explaining how your code speedruns is ok. But I don't see what the point is when I'm planning on reviewing your code.

  2. You've asked us to not focus on reviewing the speedrunning efficiency.
    So the majority of your description is redundant to us.

  3. You've not really talked about the code.
    Talking about what the code does isn't talking about the code. Most of the code I write can be summed up in a sentence or two. "Yeah, the code speed runs Nintendo Nightmare." However if another programmer wants to talk about my code, I'll need to talk about more than the high-level description.

  4. I've never used Game Maker 8.0, nor have I ever heard of Nintendo Nightmare. How do I run your code?

Additional content

how does one upload files to stack Exchange...
https://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/57553444#57553444

For what you want to do, you can't.

Do we have to attach the files somehow as renamed images?

And it’s not in a text file.
https://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/57553849#57553849

isn’t it against policies and etiquette to link to an external site?
https://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/57553460#57553460

Oh no I meant in general. I thought on ANY website, you should never link people off-site. I’ve always considered it rude.
https://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/57553475#57553475

Lets just stick to your situation. You have some images you want us to have access to. Stack Exchange doesn't provide a way to give us images in a meaningful way. So if you want to provide us images focus on getting us the images, not 'the proper etiquette'.

Using a third party site like GitHub or GitLab would be a preferable way to get us the data. However distributing the files using an FTP site by giving us an archive - .zip, .tar.gz, .rar - is also an option.

Getting us what we need is more important.

Furthermore, how do we include all the code in a large project?

If you have less than 65536 characters you can just post the code in the question.
If you have more code you need to use another site like GitHub or GitLab.

Code

Am I required to include the entire program’s source as part of the code to be reviewed?

No. However providing a means to easily access and use the entire source is helpful for getting a review. As such providing the code on say a third party site like GitHub or GitLab could be beneficial.

The more you make your question a simple "get code and assets -> compile code without issues", the easier a reviewer can review your code. If the easiest way is to use another site like GitHub or GitLab, then use a third party site to get us the extra code and assets.

Will your code ever be answered?

  1. Your code is not C, so asking C programmers to review your code is not a sensible idea.
  2. GML (Game Maker Language - the language your code is written in) only has two questions.

As such Code Review is unlikely to have many GML programmers that can help you.

\$\endgroup\$
9
  • \$\begingroup\$ “Ok, I've never used Game Maker 8.0, nor have I ever heard of Nintendo Nightmare. How do I get the stuff to run your code?” Right. This goes back to the issue of how I am supposed to provide the full source code. I’m not sure how that follows off that quote though. That’s got nothing to do with running the game. I meant if people want detailed diagrams of every single thing, I will have to make them manually. \$\endgroup\$
    – user64742
    Apr 6 at 15:59
  • \$\begingroup\$ “Using a third party site like GitHub or GitLab would be a preferable way to get us the data. However distributing the files using an FTP site by giving us an archive - .zip, .tar.gz, .rar - is also an option.” Putting it on github is definitely is a good idea, but it will probably take a bit. Since I didn’t make the same posting it publicly on my own GitHub is probably inappropriate (though I’m going to guess sure the dev will have no issue either doing it or giving me permission once he’s not asleep in his time zone). The original source is a public download so I’ll link that for now. \$\endgroup\$
    – user64742
    Apr 6 at 16:04
  • \$\begingroup\$ “You've asked us to not focus on reviewing the speedrunning efficiency. So the majority of your description is redundant to us.” I am concerned that by not excluding that, I would by making the post off topic for code review... though I do want that reviewed. Perhaps I am mistaken, but I thought Code Review SE was only allowed to ask for non-functional cleanup stuff like refactoring large pieces of code that are getting out of hand or writing better functions. I strongly believe my code is a bit out of control (Seems excessive in size) but nothing stands out to me as the culprit. \$\endgroup\$
    – user64742
    Apr 6 at 16:12
  • \$\begingroup\$ "I’m not sure how that follows off that quote though. That’s got nothing to do with running the game." I don't understand how "related code" has "got nothing to do with running the game". Have I misunderstood what these related things are? \$\endgroup\$
    – Peilonrayz Mod
    Apr 6 at 16:40
  • \$\begingroup\$ @user64742 I'm having a hard time understanding the following quote, have you typod? "I am concerned that by [] excluding that..." Heavily cutting down the explanation to 1/4 of the size should be doable and keep your question on-topic. If you go "too far" (pretty hard to do) I can just add something back to cross the question over the line. However if you focus on explaining the technical parts of the code there will be no problem. I don't think your question is off-topic, but I don't think a long partially tangential description is doing you any favours. \$\endgroup\$
    – Peilonrayz Mod
    Apr 6 at 16:47
  • \$\begingroup\$ “I don't understand how "related code" has "got nothing to do with running the game". Have I misunderstood what these related things are?” I meant if one wanted me to specifically include cherry-picked portions for context or provide extraction scrips for generating 3D models of maps. \$\endgroup\$
    – user64742
    Apr 6 at 17:48
  • \$\begingroup\$ “I'm having a hard time understanding the following quote” I was referring to your statement about rejecting speedrun specific feedback. I actually do want such feedback but I was under the impression when originally making the post that site rules require I insist that all feedback not discuss speedrun efficiency... because that wouldn’t fall under pure code style feedback. \$\endgroup\$
    – user64742
    Apr 6 at 17:52
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ @user64742 ① Thank you. Indeed, I have misunderstood the section of text I quoted. I have edited my answer to remove the irrelevant quote. Do you have any qualms with the 4th bullet point now? ② to be clear you think the following is required to be on-topic? "for the purposes of this review there is no requirement to review the actual run itself or the efficiency of that run". Kind of, if you're only asking for a review of speedrun optimizations then no (not code so) not allowed. If you're happy of a review of your code and speedrun optimizations your fine. \$\endgroup\$
    – Peilonrayz Mod
    Apr 6 at 18:16
  • 3
    \$\begingroup\$ Note: we are unlikely to point out speedrun optimizations. You may get lucky but you'd be very much rolling the dice. \$\endgroup\$
    – Peilonrayz Mod
    Apr 6 at 18:20

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .