|
We have a forum for article mentors so this would mirror that.
Good idea.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
If you consider this response I just finished (which the process of writing provided an excellent rejuvenation of some of my synaptic webs related to ControlCollections, and run-time adding of Controls)[^]:
The question this raises for me is: in the long-run, are we doing more for CP by functioning as teachers, or by functioning as "answer providers:" when the OP's code shows fundamental mis-understandings.
I am not clear about this within myself: it pleases me to "teach," but, given the rapid turnover in the Lounge, perhaps longer posts, like this one tonight, "submerge," and do not have enduring value ?
While a quick re-write of code, without the didactic element, and without a demand for the OP to "invest" in responding to detailed critique/analysis before replying again with "answers:" has immediate value to the OP, and others ?
One thing I am totally clear about is: I have great respect for many of the dedicated (amazingly prolific) responders to QA questions, who do respond in very different styles !
Viva diversity !
best, Bill
"There is a computer disease that anybody who works with computers knows about. It's a very serious disease and it interferes completely with the work. The trouble with computers is that you 'play' with them!" Richard Feynman.
modified 6-Sep-12 23:41pm.
|
|
|
|
|
I was going to delete a article draft I havent published yet. The trouble was, that in My Article's page there is a delete button, but when I pushed that button, the article didnt get deleted. I popped up again when I refreshed the page.
If I opend the draft, and pushed delete there, I got redirected to a page that said "Do you really want to delete this article?", and then clicked yes It worked as expected.
|
|
|
|
|
From the draft is the intended place to delete the article, with the "Do you really want to delete this article" as the additional step to prevent accidental deletion.
That said, we'll go through the deletion process again to make sure all is well.
Thanks,
Sean Ewington
The Code Project
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks, no big thing, just though I let you know 
|
|
|
|
|
|
For comparison, here[^] is the deleted one.
|
|
|
|
|
This is by no means an isolated incident, and there is not much you can do apart from adding comments and votes with your opinion.
One of these days I'm going to think of a really clever signature.
|
|
|
|
|
Well, you can also report it as being misleading by using the red flag.
|
|
|
|
|
I don't believe it is misleading in that sense; it's just not a very good article.
One of these days I'm going to think of a really clever signature.
|
|
|
|
|
I dont really know C++ well enough to comment on that. You could downvote the article, but you can also flag the article if you find it appropriate, that was my only point
|
|
|
|
|
I agree with you; that is possible on any article awaiting approval. I'm just not sure why Espen has singled this one out when there are plenty of badly written submissions posted here.
One of these days I'm going to think of a really clever signature.
|
|
|
|
|
Quote: Espen has singled this one out
Proberbly becouse a simular article by the same person was deleted before, but that is just my guess.
Quote: is possible on any article awaiting approval
You can do it on published articles also.
|
|
|
|
|
I know the history of this article and I also know how, why and when one can vote. My comment was directed at why Espen has got excited about this particular posting, when so many poorly structured articles still get past the reviewers on a fairly regular basis.
One of these days I'm going to think of a really clever signature.
|
|
|
|
|
Perhaps due to the fact that many members could approve an article and make it live. I agree that there are articles that border on misleading, but a simple comments should suffice in the circumstance, after all they may provide many useful articles leater. I guess that there is an advantage for everyone to allow more articles to be printed on the site and the voting would say something on how valid they are to outsiders.
So I guess that I agree with you...
|
|
|
|
|
Given the number of articles this author has created previously, I don't think he needs to go through the approval process.
|
|
|
|
|
 I dont get it, what and who are we talking about here?
|
|
|
|
|
The author of the article that has Espenn all hot and bothered has already written 14 articles. I don't think his articles go into the pile.
|
|
|
|
|
Ah, I see, little slow today, sorry  I any case I see that the article is deleted now. But I somethimes find it hard to judge if an article should be approved or not, but the guidelines specify that if the author has done his best, you should approve it. Misleading articles might be harder to identify..
|
|
|
|
|
|
Read it, Pete, just read it ... I'm not saying that everything Ladislav has written is rubbish, I've even upvoted him, but this article presents material that is plain wrong.
|
|
|
|
|
Espenn - I tried to read it, honestly I did, but the formatting threw me so much that I gave up. I appreciate that English isn't his first language but, even taking that into account, I couldn't follow it because paragraph breaks happened in odd places.
|
|
|
|
|
Find the section starting with I call it Hurray stl vector<everything> trend.
Do you want destructors to be called on an object when a pointer to that object goes out of scope?
shared_ptr provides something resembling this functionality at the library level.
|
|
|
|
|
Espen Harlinn wrote: Do you want destructors to be called on an object when a pointer to that object
goes out of scope?
I'm still confused by this article. Is he stating that he wants the language to cope with this by default? Is he asking for some form of reference counted/garbage collected tidy up?
When I was coding C++ (a long time ago I grant you), I rarely saw a need for the language to do this - there are too many edge cases where a non-determenistic delete could cause you problems. With a little bit of discipline, it's very easy to ensure that you tidy up (that and a couple of handy macros to write out the address of the object when it was created, and the address when it was deleted - if there's a mismatch in the count, you know that you may have a leak and you know which object it is).
|
|
|
|
|
Pete O'Hanlon wrote: Is he stating that he wants the language to cope with this by default? Is he
asking for some form of reference counted/garbage collected tidy up?
That seems to be the case.
The next release of the C++ standard is scheduled for 2017, and I don't think we'll see many changes to the language. We're probably going to add constructs supporting parallel programming and perhaps concepts. I also expect that we'll see some clarifications related to the current standard.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
