13
\$\begingroup\$

An SO user commented this on a question that would possibly be a candidate for Code Review:

I think we need a three question quiz before you can post.

Of which it was said in chat:

That's a distressingly reasonable idea

How could we word it so it's short enough for a comment, and friendly enough for the user to want to post it on CR instead of SO?

Reminder: The character limit for comments is 600 characters.

\$\endgroup\$
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ I think "Does your code work as expected" would be a good one, if we could phrase it so that "too slow/inefficient" could be "expected". Maybe "Does your code have any known bugs?" \$\endgroup\$ – Fund Monica's Lawsuit Jun 12 '15 at 21:10
  • 6
    \$\begingroup\$ @QPaysTaxes I believe it is better to have questions where "Yes" is the desired answer rather than "No". "Does your code work as expected" - Yes. "Does your code have any known bugs?" - No. Besides, not having known bugs does not imply that you have tested your code. If it works as expected, then you have tested it. And we do want users to test their code before posting a question. \$\endgroup\$ – Simon Forsberg Jun 12 '15 at 21:41
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ "Does your code work?" "As expected" could invoke a "no, it's too slow" response. \$\endgroup\$ – FreeMan Jun 13 '15 at 1:08
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ I am sorry to have distressed anyone with my reasonableness. :-p \$\endgroup\$ – ceejayoz Jun 13 '15 at 2:11
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ It really is a distressingly reasonable idea... I find that in itself distressing. \$\endgroup\$ – RubberDuck Jun 15 '15 at 20:41
15
\$\begingroup\$

Taking a stab at it:

This question could be suitable for Code Review, as long as (a) your code works as intended, (b) your code is real code, rather than example code, and (c) your code is included in the body of the question. If you wish for a peer review to improve all aspects of your code, please post it on Code Review.

I think the repetition of "your code" kind of implies the "code that you own or maintain" condition. I think the last phrase wraps in the "review any/all aspects."

Copy/Paste-friendly version:

This question could be suitable for [Code Review](https://codereview.stackexchange.com/help), as long as (a) your code works as intended, (b) your code is real code, rather than example code, and (c) your code is included in the body of the question. If you wish for a peer review to improve all aspects of your code, please post it on Code Review.

(348 characters)

Reminder: The character limit for comments is 600 characters.

\$\endgroup\$
  • \$\begingroup\$ ...Man, I feel like I stole mine (updated answer) from you, even though I finished it before you finished yours \$\endgroup\$ – Fund Monica's Lawsuit Jun 12 '15 at 23:14
  • 4
    \$\begingroup\$ Doesn't matter, we're all doing this for the greater cause :) \$\endgroup\$ – Phrancis Jun 12 '15 at 23:26
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ "delete your questions here" That sounds... a little vague, y'know? Like you want me to delete all my Stack Overflow questions. \$\endgroup\$ – Fund Monica's Lawsuit Jun 12 '15 at 23:33
  • \$\begingroup\$ @QPaysTaxes I edited that part to make it singular \$\endgroup\$ – Simon Forsberg Jun 13 '15 at 0:16
  • \$\begingroup\$ Perhaps you could make the "delete your question" part even less negative by just saying "please repost it on Code Review instead." \$\endgroup\$ – jacwah Jun 14 '15 at 21:08
  • \$\begingroup\$ Should we emphasize "your" like this: *your* in case someone doesn't get it? \$\endgroup\$ – SirPython Jun 21 '15 at 1:53
  • \$\begingroup\$ This question could be suitable for Code Review, as long as (a) your code works as intended, (b) your code is real code, rather than example code, and (c) your code is included in the body of the question. If you wish for a peer review to improve all aspects of your code, please post it on Code Review and delete your question here on Stack Overflow. \$\endgroup\$ – Phrancis Jun 22 '15 at 21:46
  • \$\begingroup\$ @SirPython I could go either way, but I think the repetition of "your" is probably sufficient. The "somebody else's code" issue doesn't come up really that often \$\endgroup\$ – Phrancis Jun 22 '15 at 21:47
11
\$\begingroup\$

They should probably each be short and encapsulate the idea that:

  1. You want a review on every facet of the code, not just some.
  2. The code in question works as intended.
  3. The code in the question is actual code, not hypothetical or pseudocode.

Phrancis brought up a good point in chat: There should also be something to the effect of

If all three criteria are met, please delete this question and post it on Code Review.

Put all that together, and you get something like this:

This question looks like it might be a pretty good fit for Code Review.SE, provided that (a) you want every aspect of your code reviewed, not just some, (b) your code is already working, and (c) you're asking for a review of concrete, real code, not abstract design (whether or not it's expressed as code). If you agree with all of those, please read about what's on topic, and, if your question fits that, delete it here and repost it on CR.

Or, in copypasta-friendly format:

This question looks like it might be a pretty good fit for [Code Review.SE](https://codereview.stackexchange.com/), provided that (a) you want _every aspect_ of your code reviewed, not just some, (b) your code is _already working_, and (c) you're asking for a review of _concrete, real code_, not abstract design (whether or not it's expressed as code). If you agree with all of those, please read about [what's on topic](https://codereview.stackexchange.com/help/on-topic), and, if your question fits that, delete it here and repost it on CR.

Reminder: The character limit for comments is 600 characters. The current one is 541 characters.


NOTE: This post is Community Wiki for a reason, but I'd appreciate it if you gave others a chance to provide input on changes by commenting before you edit, unless it's something trivial like fixing a spelling mistake.

\$\endgroup\$
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ Please see this comment: meta.codereview.stackexchange.com/questions/5468/… . I'd rather see "Does your code work as intended?" as a question. \$\endgroup\$ – Simon Forsberg Jun 12 '15 at 21:42
  • \$\begingroup\$ "Code is your own" doesn't come up that often, and it's kind of implied when you say "Your code" in the "does it have known bugs" question \$\endgroup\$ – Phrancis Jun 12 '15 at 23:06
  • \$\begingroup\$ @SimonAndréForsberg Mind taking another look? \$\endgroup\$ – Fund Monica's Lawsuit Jun 12 '15 at 23:33
  • 3
    \$\begingroup\$ (a) you want every aspect of your code reviewed, not just some I don't think that part is enforced often enough to really warrant a part in this comment. And if it should be a part of the comment, it should definitely not be the first. \$\endgroup\$ – Simon Forsberg Jun 13 '15 at 0:15
  • \$\begingroup\$ @SimonAndréForsberg Good point. What would you suggest in its place? "You're asking for a review of existing features" maybe, to cover that advice about code to be written is OT? \$\endgroup\$ – Fund Monica's Lawsuit Jun 13 '15 at 0:17
  • \$\begingroup\$ @QPaysTaxes That's already a part of "works as intended". I think Phrancis' suggestion is better, where 'include code in question' is added. \$\endgroup\$ – Simon Forsberg Jun 13 '15 at 0:22
  • \$\begingroup\$ I'm not a native speaker, but shouldn't it be "if you agree with all of these"? Not "all of those?"? \$\endgroup\$ – holroy Jan 9 '16 at 1:27
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ @holroy I'm a native speaker, and probably. Better phrasing would probably be "If all of these are correct" though. \$\endgroup\$ – Fund Monica's Lawsuit Jan 9 '16 at 1:36
7
\$\begingroup\$

If we're going to be posting these kinds of comments, we should be careful not to steal questions from Stack Overflow that are actually on-topic for Stack Overflow. (That's important: many Stack Overflow users (both newbies and veterans) don't understand what makes a question inappropriate for Stack Overflow, and they will get frustrated unless we explain why their question needs to be moved at all.) I think that the wording proposed for a standard off-topic reason would serve our purpose well:

Questions about existing working code must identify a specific problem or concern. Requests for open-ended critique to improve code that already works as intended may be appropriate on Code Review.

That covers two key criteria: the code must work, and the author must be receptive to suggestions for improvements in general. Use your own judgement about whether the code looks too hypothetical or excessively reduced before posting the comment.

Markdown for copying:

Questions about existing working code must identify a **specific problem or concern**. Requests for **open-ended critique** to improve code that already works as intended may be appropriate on [Code Review](https://codereview.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5777).

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

A shorter, more focused one

This is only two questions/requirements, but it may be handy:

This may be a question for Code Review, so long as: (A) the code works, and (B) it's not hypothetical or incomplete in any way. Please read the on-topic guide before posting, if you choose to go to Code Review.

Postable version:

This may be a question for [Code Review](http://codereview.stackexchange.com), so long as: **(A)** _the code works_, **and (B)** _it's not hypothetical or incomplete in any way_. Please read the [on-topic guide](https://codereview.stackexchange.com/help/on-topic) before posting, if you choose to go to [Code Review](https://codereview.stackexchange.com/questions/ask).

362 characters length

\$\endgroup\$

You must log in to answer this question.

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