On Mon, Jan 24, 2011 at 11:44 PM, Andraž Kos <[email protected]> wrote: > I guess it never went said because nobody thought it needs to be said... > Below is my 0.02€ manifesto how things "should" be done most of the time > from practical standpoint for everyone's benefit. > > disclamer: This has nothing to do with writing 3 lines of static code in > context of the convo. It is about posting and testing longer complex > executable code which this group is all about. > > On Mon, Jan 24, 2011 at 21:27, אריה גלזר <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> but I do skip code snippets. The reason is that my mail client (gmail) >> usually breaks the formatting, so it's much harder to read. >> Also, long code snippets usually have 1 or 2 breaking points, so reading >> the entire code to find them is much more work than simply running them >> lastly, by copy-pasting the code, I can't be sure I'm using it the way it >> was intended. > > This is exactly the reason why everything that looks like broken code > gibberish gets muted: > the example "doesn't work" in my email client, it is not even a proper > example because to me it looks like an example of some text between two > <pre> tags, and I guess that was not the thing you had in mind? > All I can see is some broken lines and redundant html/js gibberish with > headers, includes etc... who cares about that? Where is the misbehaving code > to inspect? Where is the code highlight? Where is the run button in my email > client/Google group view to execute the sample, so I can quickly find and > fix the error? How can I with a single click reindent this code and recover > broken lines and indents? > Why don't you let me to just open the online IDE, write my first thought of > a fix and start debugging your running product? > Including all dependencies and solving just this one from some code copy > reconstruction surgery is way too much hassle... I would rather go forward > and help the next five in the same time frame. This way my time distribution > is more fair for everyone else. > ___________ > > We don't have time to copy code around just to run it. YOU make it runnable > online in the exact way YOU intended to run it and help us help you with > fixing it. > Post a link to fiddle/jsbin that works 95% and explain to us what is missing > to make it a 100%. Eventually you'll get a reply with link to the fixed > revision and explanation where were the missing 5% you missed. > If you want the solution to be in the mail archive, be my guest and copy it > in a reply at the end when we get it to 100%, but we need a place to debug > it first. Code diff's and nonworking code imho do NOT belong to the > archives, only the accepted working solution does. > > btw: make your fiddle LintLess before posting. JSLint button solves half of > the bugs and saves time. ;) > > -- > To view archived discussions from the original JSMentors Mailman list: > http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ > > To search via a non-Google archive, visit here: > http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected] >
Adding extra layers of complexity doesn't help track down problems. It doesn't improve communication and it separate away pieces that needs to stay together in the same place they were created. Even by just having Firebug enabled locally in their browsers developers are experiencing different behaviors from the same piece of code run without Firebug enabled. JSFiddle is good... nonetheless ! You may have more luck by adding a mailing list like this to JSFiddle instead :) -- Diego -- To view archived discussions from the original JSMentors Mailman list: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ To search via a non-Google archive, visit here: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]
