-3
\$\begingroup\$

I was looking at some questions and also the guidelines of StackExchange clearly state that it's impossible to avoid opinion in something which is done by human being. According to SE, but also to every scientist, Math is the only matter which is not opinion based.

Especially for a this site this is even more true. We are asking the other to give another formulation of a code which is already working. We are asking for their opinion on our code.

I think it would be very hard to provide a link to a single question which is not opinion based here. Of course I can be wrong..

I think the tag "put on hold as primarily opinion-based" should be addressed only to question which are saying: "which is the best" or "which is the most elegant".. and so on.

But mine is a question.. I would like to know what's your opinion on what I have just wrote..

\$\endgroup\$
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ Is this in reference to a particular question? \$\endgroup\$ – RubberDuck Oct 7 '14 at 16:59
  • \$\begingroup\$ Probably this one \$\endgroup\$ – Quaxton Hale Oct 7 '14 at 17:00
  • \$\begingroup\$ tangentially related.. how is christianity different from other sites? All the points you make in your question can be found in the post over there, too (just christianity related). I personally found the answer over there very good to clear the scope of an inherently opinion-based q&a site \$\endgroup\$ – Vogel612 Oct 7 '14 at 17:21
  • \$\begingroup\$ I've deleted this question: codereview.stackexchange.com/questions/65000/… from Code Review. However my thought there was reference to no particular question. I said the same stuff 6 months ago in another section and I got very different answers. The high rep users there were less flexible. They were trying to argue that question may be not opinionated. Good night. \$\endgroup\$ – Revious Oct 7 '14 at 20:40
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ I'd be interested to hear from the downvoters. I find this to be a very legitimate and well formed question. \$\endgroup\$ – RubberDuck Oct 8 '14 at 0:37
  • \$\begingroup\$ @RubberDuck: thanks, me too, and I'm very sad about this attitude so widespread.. bah. Really thanks however. PS: they would probably simply answer with an excuse and I would advice them to read this article en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rationalization_(making_excuses) \$\endgroup\$ – Revious Oct 8 '14 at 7:29
13
\$\begingroup\$

Stack Exchange has guidelines on good subjective vs. bad subjective questions. In summary, questions for which all answers are equally valid are not constructive and would be closed as "primarily opinion-based" or "too broad".

On the other hand, suggestions for changes that are generally recognized by most programmers as improvements are welcome. These include

  • application of design patterns
  • application style guides, especially official ones
  • clarity and readability
  • idiomatic expressions for the chosen programming language

In addition, there are many non-subjective issues that we frequently address!

\$\endgroup\$
15
\$\begingroup\$

Code Reviews are all opinionated yes, even math is opinionated (occasionally, and for some values of math).

Now, if you are seeking a code review, then your question is not opinionted as per the scope of Code Review.

But, if your question basically starts with:

Imagine you have a class with dozens of the follow lines of code and that you should localize it.

Then it is opinionated, because using imagination to that extent requires more context and opinion than can be scoped back to the code in the question.

In addition, you are providing two different ways to initialize three variable declarations, and that's it.... you do not ask for a review of either version, you sort of suggest that you want affirmation that the second version is better, based on the title of the question: "Localizing a long list of description in a static class"

So, are you asking whether your second version is an improvement over the first, or are you asking us to review the second version (in which case the first version is moot)?

Are you looking for a discussion on what best practices would be in this 'imaginary' use case?

If any of those are the case, then the question is either opinionated, or off topic.

You need to present working, real code, and that can be reviewed.

Discussions about best practices are not on topic, broken code is off topic too, and 'imagine you have' situations are very off topic and opinionated.

Now, whether your question should be closed as off-topic, or opinionated, or too broad, is really not significant because I can think of reasons for each of them, but can choose only one. (Update: too broad is also an option here)

Update On a serious note, the basic premise of Code Review was summarized as: "Does this code make my ass look fat" .... and that requires an opinionated response. So, yes, Code Review is opinionated, but the opinions have to be based on code that is presented in the question, not sucked from imagination or elsewhere.

\$\endgroup\$
8
\$\begingroup\$

Your question about localization is problematic, not just because it is primarily opinion-based. I would have closed it for multiple other reasons.

It's also off-topic because it is hypothetical code (as indicated by "Imagine you have a class…").

Furthermore, the interesting portion of your solution, the Resource class, was omitted from your question. We are left inferring and imagining how you implemented it. We would then be stuck reviewing imaginary code.

\$\endgroup\$

You must log in to answer this question.

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