2
\$\begingroup\$

Parsing text from reports was closed a few hours ago, with "must contain working code" as the reason, despite the fact that the original question had a working code snippet, as I pointed out in a comment early on. Furthermore, it has now been edited by the OP to include a fully functional program.

Please help reopen the question, or alternatively, explain your votes to close.

\$\endgroup\$
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ unless the question is read carefully it seems like the code doesn't work, but the OP has said they could only get it to work using the last bit of code, I voted to Reopen, \$\endgroup\$ – Malachi Nov 5 '13 at 22:50
  • \$\begingroup\$ I cast the 5th reopen vote, it's open now. \$\endgroup\$ – Mathieu Guindon Nov 6 '13 at 0:32
0
\$\begingroup\$

I agree with @Malachi:

unless the question is read carefully it seems like the code doesn't work, but the OP has said they could only get it to work using the last bit of code

A question like this may need to have been read carefully in order to determine whether or not it should be closed. I admit that I didn't read it carefully enough, and I apologize for that. Even if it still wasn't clear to me, I should've skipped the vote.

Ideally, I would hope to see an OP use the word "working" to indicate that the code does work. I'm not suggesting this be new policy, though. I'm just used to an OP keeping it clear that his/her code works, which could also be an indication that the FAQ was read prior to posting. But I certainly understand that that cannot be the case each time, so I will be sure to read more carefully in the future.

I just wanted to get that out there. Anyway, I have already voted to reopen.

\$\endgroup\$

You must log in to answer this question.

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