48
No. We require the code to be contained within the question, for the following reasons:
To avoid dependency on third-party hosting services. These links tend to go away after a while.
To prevent review requests of huge projects.
To make it easier to see the code and so it can interest more reviewers and get more reviews.
To avoid confusion when the OP ...
31
I don't see any reason to treat other Stack Exchange sites in a special way regarding this issue: Reasons #3 and especially #4 are still very important.
Posts in the Stack Exchange network can always be edited and/or deleted, both of which could potentially invalidate any existing answers or remove the code to be reviewed before any answers were created.
...
30
I agree with seand, but I'd also point another facet.
Why doesn't the poster edit their question to put the code in?
They don't want their code in that question, (seand's case) in that case we shouldn't override their wishes.
They never came back to look at the question, and so don't see the comments telling them to edit their code into the question. In ...
25
No.
Because there's a reason we require your code to be embedded in the question:
24
The CR GitHub organization seems to have been a solution in search of a problem.
If after all these years we still don't know what to use it for, let's just kill it.
If it's ever needed again, it will reappear organically.
21
I think it's a brilliant idea! Done right, it can very well:
Increase CR visibility
Increase CR voting
Increase CR activity as a whole
My recommendations:
Start with an introductory video that presents Code Review to your viewers; then you can start each actual review video with something like "If you don't know what CR is, check out [this quick ...
19
I think that there is also a legal reason for this: whenever you post something to a Stack Exchange site, you release it under the CC-BY-SA license. If the author doesn't post the code here, but to some other site, then they most likely didn't release it under that license. And you as someone who didn't write that code have no right to do that.
17
According to What topics I can ask about here?:
Simply ask yourself the following questions. To be on-topic the answer must be yes to all questions:
Does my question contain code? (Please include the code in the question, not a link to it)
Did I write that code?
Is it actual code from a project rather than pseudo-code or example code?
Do I ...
17
What is code but instructions to a compiler?
Would we allow an obscure language that no one here has a compiler to? I would hope the answer is yes. You might not be able to answer it but another person might.
I can currently think of more than one example that we would accept but requires an extension/plugin. less-css is one that I personally use. It ...
16
I agree with @JamesKhoury.
The GNU GPL defines "source code" as "the preferred form of the work for making modifications to it". For the author of the question, that means the version of the code with the meta-programming annotations.
It does not make sense to review the post-processed form of the code, because we would then be critiquing auto-generated ...
15
A couple weeks ago I posted a comment to a question requesting the author add his code inline. He refused, and after I explained it was part of the rules he deleted the question.
I think the decision to add the code should stay with the author, unless there's no doubt he won't mind (such as with pastebinned snippets).
13
Update
Implemented, see the Code Review question, for feature requests please open an issue on GitHub
It looks a little something like this:
Code Review http://www.zomis.net/codereview/shield/?qid=95459&mode=score Code Review http://www.zomis.net/codereview/shield/?qid=95459&mode=answers Code Review http://www.zomis.net/codereview/shield/?qid=...
13
I think the poster's intention behind embedding the minified Respond.js library in the question was just to make the Stack Snippet work, and not to request a review of it. The minified code, arguably, doesn't really qualify as source code anyway. (The GPL, for example, defines source code as "the preferred form of the work for making modifications to it" — ...
11
Code Review only allows for reviews of code that is written/maintained by the author. We have that requirement for multiple reasons, including legal (copyright) and moral (to avoid code-shaming).
When a question asks to compare the poster's solution against some arbitrary solution found on GitHub, that is a underhanded way to ask for a review of third-party ...
10
It is on-topic, however I would remove the java tag.
At least for all the coffeescript questions I ruthlessly remove the javascript tag, it is not JavaScript! Tags should reflect the language of the code, not the language that is about to be generated.
10
Uhm, no idea how it got there....
EDIT The pastebin was created at Sept 4, 03:55:07 PM CDT, the Code Review post was created at Sept 4, 20:52:59Z
By my calculation (with the PM-to-24h, and CDT-to-Zulu time: -5hr), the PasteBin was created at
Sept 4, 03:55:07 PM CDT
Sept 4, 15:55:07 CDT
Sept 4, 20:55:07 Z
The Pastebin was created.... 2 minutes and ...
9
Yes, many question do in fact have links to an external repository where the complete code is hosted. The important thing, as you noted, is to ensure that the relevant code to be reviewed is embedded in the question itself. Reviewers may consult the external code, but shouldn't be under any obligation to do so.
If linking to a version-controlled ...
8
Post the relevant code you want reviewed and include a link to the GitHub repository.
You may include additional code you don't want reviewed, if you think it will help reviewers (for example, it might be easier than reading two tabs in parallel). In that case, indicate clearly the parts you don't want reviewed.
See also similar discussions on this site, ...
8
Your question here suggests that there is a problem with hosting images that are not on "placeholder" services...
I'm not sure how it was obtained and what is the background. As some
other images that show up around.
My question: Should we allow those?
So, first up, what's wrong with having images that are not on 'placeholder' systems? Copying an ...
7
Those questions would be off topic. We cannot depend on external sites to make a question useful.
From the help topic on asking:(emphasis added)
To be on-topic the answer must be yes to all questions:
Does my question contain code? (Please include the code in the question, not a link to it)
JSFiddle is useful for demoing and testing code, ...
7
Questions on Code Review must have the code in the post.
Can I put my code on a third party site and link to the site in my question?
Reviews of code not stored here
Can I ask for a review on a website?
Questions that ask for you to e-mail them to get the code
If you want reviews of each video:
Post the relevant final code from the video you want reviewed....
6
The bare minimum to post a question is to include some code.
If you were to post a question that only included main.cpp, but not Drawable.cpp or Drawable.h, and didn't mention anything about this Bitmap.cpp, then it'd be on-topic, but a really poor question (as we don't know what half the code is).
Building from this, you can include the code you want, and ...
6
If you want to leave the GitHub organization, leave.
That's what I did myself. I personally felt that it doesn't serve a purpose and I personally don't see a reason to stay inside the organization. The last thing I changed before I left was to fix the webhook for the CodeReviewCommunity.github.io repository so that all changes/issues/comments to it gets ...
6
I think the accepted answer needs an update because now the faq states
* Am I an owner or maintainer of the code?
If you are going to be maintaining the 3rd party code going forward, then yes this it the right site for you. (I love this change)
6
We can't generalize about all fiddles, since they are not all run by the same entity.
Nothing lasts forever.
Despite the best intentions, situations change. A fiddle site could go dead due to cash flow reasons, or for a stupid mistake such as accidentally letting a domain registration lapse.
However, permanence of the link is not the only consideration. A ...
5
Wow sites like this are exactly why I only use StackExchange sites. Don't you find us much better-looking? :)
I don't think it's a good idea to just link to that site. If you're talking about this post then I think you've done the right thing.
You see we like our stuff self-contained within SE (true on all sites), so it's VERY likely that your question ...
4
make sure that your code works.
that should be first.
then take out all the explanation stuff, someone that is reviewing your code will most likely understand what you are talking about.
break it up into separate questions, the post that you created is rather lengthy, and ask if there is anything that can be improved in the code and why or how. this ...
4
It's been almost two days and still can't find out how the code is working(?). It might be that I'm not very familiar with Java8. Still I would say the question is on-topic. Why?
To quote palacsint
See also: Effective Java, 2nd edition, Item 47: Know and use the
libraries (The author mentions only the JDK's built-in libraries but I
think the ...
3
That's neat, I have something similar on my GitHub though it's meant for me, I like how this is designed to explain to a user how to improve their question. If you want to, I (and probably some other regulars) would be happy to help put something together that's more adapted to Code Review and prepare some pull requests to add to the website.
3
Videos are no substitute for actual code.
However, if the code is included in the question and the question complies to the help center, I don't see a problem.
Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible
