|
I really don't consider an article's usefulness to me when voting. Good code doesn't have to be relevant to anything I'm working on to be good code. Lots of good programmers do stuff that doesn't interest me, and do it very well, indeed! Why should I downgrade an article because it doesn't apply to what I do?
Will Rogers never met me.
|
|
|
|
|
Hell, if someone wrote an article for Code Project and it got published, it's probably worth five stars.
Personal growth is what is important.
If I say: 'We are all participants in our "group mentality,"' then I'm saying it for the sake of me AND/OR you. Sure, there is a loophole in my logic .... (applause) 
What I don't like is religious/political/gender/race bashing. I guess opinions may occur to agree, but the malice which proceeds from some individuals seems to be its own reward.
Remain Calm & Continue To Google
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, all (almost) CP articles rates between 3 to 5. But there are 200 floating point numbers in between for you to judge the rating.
You might know by now that there is a separate forum where you can raise your specific thoughts/bugs/suggestions for whatever you feel should be addressed.
I understand few people (out of 12 million members, as stated by codeproject) misuse the website by illogical voting. CodeProject has gone a long way to prevent such kind of actions, still trying hard to fill the loopholes.
I would rather appreciate CP for making it so nice website instead of criticizing the loopholes in it.
Criticism should go in site bug/suggestions forum with specific examples, IMHO.
Life is a computer program and everyone is the programmer of his own life.
|
|
|
|
|
|
What's worst is that lots of articles and most short tips code on the web will show code snippet how to do some task, but make no reference to what libraries or namespaces being use. As though it is magically appear out of thin air.
|
|
|
|
|
ha ha 
event me felt the same many times.
|
|
|
|
|
I find that interesting, because a lot of the articles I write about are attempts at innovative new ideas and those are the articles that also interest me the most. Leads to me wonder, what do people actually want to read about?
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
Marc,
I rated Innovation a bit lower as have others, obviously.
The challenge is that I want it to be about programming, and other things first.
If you come up with an innovative way to do Run Length Encoding, or IEEE Floating point math, that is fine, but I have little use, other than casually reading it.
If it is something I am interested in, programming related, and then innovative, then clearly. As the Author, your bias is that the first 2 are already handled.
I am interested in learning things I can relate to, might need, or have needed. Innovative comes after informative.
HTH in some way!
|
|
|
|
|
As a "consumer" (reader) of an article I am mainly interested in the topic, it's usefulness for me personally. I often read through groups of articles to get an explanation of the "how-to" if I have a specific problem.
I do not search for the most innovative, most funny or most elegant way. I look for a way that WORKS and one I am able to UNDERSTAND.
As an "author" I, of course, try to post "good", "elegant" and sometimes "innovative" ways to solve specific problems, but I also write most basic articles (like a simple how-to for a Chrome extension).
The main focus should be on transporting the information your consumer wants to get out of the article.
If it is good or bad if you do it in the most innovative way, depends on how you place the article.
Name it "How to create a basic extension for xyz" and you go super-deep to an assembler-near-level, including dont-know-how-much-native-c++ code and bring up the super-advanced, but most innovative way, you might get bad ratings. But if you name the same article "Advanced lowlevel extension programming for xyz" you might get all-5-star.
But the majority seems to look for easy-to-understand explanation articles, that let them understand a new technology, library, system, platform, you name it.
I can understand why "innovative" is seen as not-so-important.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Not everyone is at your level of expertise and experience.
Most just want to figure out how to do something that they are trying to figure out at the moment.
Some will like to experiment with the latest and greatest stuff at some point, but not everyone.
|
|
|
|
|
I am annoyed when a general problem/issue is "solved" by some great solution that works fine, assuming that all names are restricted to the a-z range. Or measures being in imperial units. Or the zip code being written before the state name - and the state name is valid. Or
Such assumptions are common even in non-programming articles, in almost any professional fields: You soon realize that 'That solution is not applicable to my issue'. Later, when you have found information solving your problem, you realize that the first author could have provided a far more general solution, with very little added complexity.
Obviously, there are very narrow, focused problems, requiring equally focused solutions. But even the problem statement is often over-focused, as if the author hasn't realized that it really is a special case of a general problem. Nobody would ever make a spelling corrector for a single word - so why do you make one for a single language? (E.g. incapable of handling extended character sets) But people do such things all the time, and show it through published articles.
|
|
|
|
|
Technical accuracy is of course to be expected but the whole point of an article is to convey information thus if it is unreadable it's worthless.
Quality of code is well accepted but examples should not be the relying point of the article, if they are it means that redability went out of the window.
Usefulness to me is subjective, but vote is subjective too so I am of course tempted to upvote something when it helps me.
Elegance is an abused word and a subjective concept: my teamworker finds cramped together line of codes without spaces elegant while I find them klingon... and put spaces before and after each operator, lay out the code on all the necessary lines and sometimes aligne them to operators (i.e. if I have several lines of initializations I tab each line aso that the assignment operators are in column). An elegant solution might be less maintainable and needing more comments than a standard one - if there is no benefit besides elegance then it has no meaning.
Humour is well accepted... if there is content. If there is not then humour is used as a filler, the article is useless and the reader wasted time. Maximum rate: 2.
* CALL APOGEE, SAY AARDWOLF
* GCS d--- s-/++ a- C++++ U+++ P- L- E-- W++ N++ o+ K- w+++ O? M-- V? PS+ PE- Y+ PGP t++ 5? X R++ tv-- b+ DI+++ D++ G e++>+++ h--- ++>+++ y+++* Weapons extension: ma- k++ F+2 X
* Never pay more than 20 bucks for a computer game.
* I'm a puny punmaker.
modified 28-Feb-17 7:00am.
|
|
|
|
|
So I didn't have a real answer for some of the virtues.
Tough luck - all or nothing.
Perhaps the survey maker should learn about either allowing a person to skip answer instead of being forced into a bogus answer - or at least put in an n/a option if that's too hard to handle.
Instead, one wonders how many of the votes for each answer are really forced entries.
Rather than contribute to creating false data (how apropos these days!) I didn't answer.
| Ravings en masse^ |
|---|
| "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | | "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
Liberals are always trying to change the way voting for things works.
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013
|
|
|
|
|
Conservatives don't do that.
They just try to stop anyone from voting who doesn't agree with them.
Kinda' like their poster-boy heros: Erdogan, Putin, and their ilk.
SAD
* By-the-way: Hump is on record condemning the electoral college system. WTF ever changed his broken little mind?
| Ravings en masse^ |
|---|
| "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | | "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
W∴ Balboos wrote: They just try to stop anyone from voting who doesn't agree with them.
It's no different for liberals.
John
|
|
|
|
|
John M. Drescher wrote: It's no different for liberals.
It's nothing like liberals.
You know it. Everything you blame on liberals is to try to excuse your own loathsome beliefs.
Get over it. Accept blame for the lack of ethics and morality that are the hallmarks of your beliefs.
| Ravings en masse^ |
|---|
| "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | | "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
W∴ Balboos wrote: Accept blame for the lack of ethics and morality that are the hallmarks of your beliefs.
Now you are exactly describing liberals.
John
|
|
|
|
|
What'll you say next? Perhaps "I'm rubber - you're glue . . . (etc.)"
That's about up to the top level mentality of those who can follow right-wing stupidity without question. A party held together by nothing but hate, greed and obstruction. Probably in that order.
Pathetic, and, of course, SAD
| Ravings en masse^ |
|---|
| "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | | "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
W∴ Balboos wrote: A party held together by nothing but hate, greed and obstruction. Probably in that order.
You just defined the democratic party.
John
|
|
|
|
|
Glue[^]
| Ravings en masse^ |
|---|
| "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | | "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
Parties suck. Ideologisms suck. People following blindly suck (more than everything else).
Liberals are a bunch of upperclass tw*ts who openly promotes helping everyone and their dog, especially if they have sad backstory, in order to fuel their egos... covertly they stand gain from the very same actions and are shielded enough by their screens of money to not suffer any backlash of petty criminality (who cares if rapes at bus stations are common enough to be rationally afraid? They don't use busses. Then they should eat brioches said someone...).
Conservatives are either slavers who profit by the same grime but need a stronger hold on their victims (such as being illegal immigrants where it can be heavily punished) or ignorant bigot peasants who would 'burn the witch' at every breath taken and who couldn't understand where they are if only they change colour to their own kitchen walls, figure what happens when they meet a different culture (not necessarily foreigners).
Then there are intelligent people.
* CALL APOGEE, SAY AARDWOLF
* GCS d--- s-/++ a- C++++ U+++ P- L- E-- W++ N++ o+ K- w+++ O? M-- V? PS+ PE- Y+ PGP t++ 5? X R++ tv-- b+ DI+++ D++ G e++>+++ h--- ++>+++ y+++* Weapons extension: ma- k++ F+2 X
* Never pay more than 20 bucks for a computer game.
* I'm a puny punmaker.
modified 2-Mar-17 4:11am.
|
|
|
|
|
I won't say I agree with your assessments - but relatively even handed bashing, I'll just leave them alone.
The main difference I see between the two parties, if characterizing behavior, is that for years now, the conservative cult all vote in lock-step whilst the liberals will disagree and fight of things.
For all the commonality they really share, one of the two wants you to think the way they think you should - the other would prefer if you (continue to) not think at all.
Alas - one thing I must add - using that rape scenario. The conservatives would blame the victim and show how they brought it upon themselves.
| Ravings en masse^ |
|---|
| "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | | "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
W∴ Balboos wrote: The main difference I see between the two parties, if characterizing behavior, is that for years now, the conservative cult all vote in lock-step whilst the liberals will disagree and fight of things.
In Italy too, left wing will always branch and divide (usually at the worst times) while right-wing will always soldier on legion-style... until the power is taken. Then they start dividing. It's a fundamental difference of life philosophy but it always hurts the lefts.
As the Romans knew very well divide et impera: and if a party is already prone to dividing by itself while the other is prone to unite under fire and fight as one the result is clear from the beginning.
One reason sometimes I hope for some real fascism isn't because I like it - instead I despise it with all my heart and, more importantly, mind - but because it has proven as the only real thing capable of uniting all the Lefts and bashing some common-sense and priorities unto them. Also it would get rid of a lot of bad grass while exposing other bad grass, that would be cleansed by the united left afterwards.
W∴ Balboos wrote: Alas - one thing I must add - using that rape scenario. The conservatives would blame the victim and show how they brought it upon themselves.
And liberals would say that we must "understand", that the perpetrator must be "helped". It's always the commoner @rseh*les that suffer, never the ideology nor the politicians or the preachers.
* CALL APOGEE, SAY AARDWOLF
* GCS d--- s-/++ a- C++++ U+++ P- L- E-- W++ N++ o+ K- w+++ O? M-- V? PS+ PE- Y+ PGP t++ 5? X R++ tv-- b+ DI+++ D++ G e++>+++ h--- ++>+++ y+++* Weapons extension: ma- k++ F+2 X
* Never pay more than 20 bucks for a computer game.
* I'm a puny punmaker.
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
