# Tag Info

12

I'm not asking to review the code This alone dismisses the idea of a meta-review as invalid, for me. We only review code. The OP could easily just post the new code and receive valuable feedback about it. Whether that's feedback about portions of the new code that have been affected by the changeset or portions of the new code that were unaffected is fairly ...

11

Creating different titles for follow-ups is difficult, so most follow-up questions tend to have very similar titles which is perfectly fine. Some options for naming a follow-up question is: XYZ Program v2 Follow-up to XYZ Program XYZ Program continued XYZ Program - follow-up If you want to be creative, you can try to be creative with your titles for the ...

9

Should these titles be edited to summarise the problem statement? Yes. Peilonrayz has already quoted the relevant text here, but came IMO to the wrong conclusion. The relevant FAQ talks about a proper suggestion of a similar title that contains the following: <Challenge platform> #<i> - <Name of challenge> It's not the best way of ...

9

This is kind-of working as intended. What you observe, is the code being taken as a point in the bulleted list. If you want this, add another 4 spaces of indentation and the code will be formatted correctly. Point Point 2 import code code.do() If you don't want this, break the bulleted list by inserting something else in between. Even an invisible HTML ...

8

How many questions with same script can I ask, if code not only merged reviews but adds new functionality? If it has new functionality (or even when it doesn't but it has been rewritten significantly enough to be new code), there's no problem with posting a new version. We've seen questions with 5 versions of the same program, every time a bit better. ...

7

What do you think? When should moderators use their powers to move a question out of the HNQ list (knowing it can't get back on afterwards)? Should moderators intervene at all? Well, I think you really nailed the point with (emphasis mine): IMO posts that don't reflect the high quality of the site, that aren't examplary specimens of what a great CR ...

7

I am not a lawyer, blah blah blah.... There is no problem, per se, in including the details of the Boost Software License in the post. Note that if the Boost folk feel there's been a copyright violation, they can use DMCA takedown processes to have the post removed, and that's the established procedure if things are copied inappropriately by a poster on ...

5

We have a tag comparative-review. I believe this indicates that we do support these kinds of reviews. The user went one step further by including the git diff; I don't see that as a problem.

5

I'm not sure I agree with giving the green light to what you've posted: IMO posts that don't reflect the high quality of the site, [...], should be kicked off the list $\therefore$ HNQ should only contain high quality questions. You have also said 'poor' and 'grey' post shouldn't be on the HNQ. we want to use the HNQ to drive traffic, yes, but not ...

4

I will only address the question "Should titles reference external resources", to which I believe the answer is: Yes. It's perfectly acceptable to reference external resources in titles. If I see the title "Advent of Code Day 5", I might already know exactly what that question is about as I myself am doing Advent of Code. It's the same if I see "Project ...

3

No, they are fine as is The comment you posted was: The current question title isn't useful without the external resource. Please edit to summarize the requirement in your own words. Please see How to get the best value out of Code Review: Asking Questions for guidance on writing good question titles. And that link clearly states: Use a title that is ...

2

What do you think? When should moderators use their powers to move a question out of the HNQ list (knowing it can't get back on afterwards)? Should moderators intervene at all? Considering the tool has been made available to fight crap, to prevent bad questions from casting a bad light on the various sites, I'd say the tool should in most cases be reserved ...

Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible