Communities

Writing
Writing
Codidact Meta
Codidact Meta
The Great Outdoors
The Great Outdoors
Photography & Video
Photography & Video
Scientific Speculation
Scientific Speculation
Cooking
Cooking
Electrical Engineering
Electrical Engineering
Judaism
Judaism
Languages & Linguistics
Languages & Linguistics
Software Development
Software Development
Mathematics
Mathematics
Christianity
Christianity
Code Golf
Code Golf
Music
Music
Physics
Physics
Linux Systems
Linux Systems
Power Users
Power Users
Tabletop RPGs
Tabletop RPGs
Community Proposals
Community Proposals
tag:snake search within a tag
answers:0 unanswered questions
user:xxxx search by author id
score:0.5 posts with 0.5+ score
"snake oil" exact phrase
votes:4 posts with 4+ votes
created:<1w created < 1 week ago
post_type:xxxx type of post
Search help
Notifications
Mark all as read See all your notifications »
Meta

Welcome to Software Development on Codidact!

Will you help us build our independent community of developers helping developers? We're small and trying to grow. We welcome questions about all aspects of software development, from design to code to QA and more. Got questions? Got answers? Got code you'd like someone to review? Please join us.

Comments on Should we have a Code Review Section / category?

Parent

Should we have a Code Review Section / category?

+10
−0

As discussed on Meta, should Software.codidact allow reviewing working code as a question?

Traffic is probably not high enough to warrant it's own Codereview community. The existing communities out there for reviewing code are not well known. New users may even view this as a new idea & it differentiates software.codidact from other software communities.

History
Why does this post require moderator attention?
You might want to add some details to your flag.
Why should this post be closed?

0 comment threads

Post
+7
−0

I agree and I think it should be a separate category, with separate posting rules. There are several examples of how the rules for each category would likely be fundamentally different:

Main Q&A category

  1. Encourages minimal examples to reproduce the problem, particularly when asking for debug help.
  2. It is fine to post questions seeking help to fix code which isn't working.
  3. Allows theoretical or big picture questions such as algorithm theory or program design.
  4. Can ask what code written by others does/works.

Code review category

  1. Encourages posting the complete code as-is, with no modifications.
  2. All code must be compiled and tested, with no known bugs.
  3. Must contain code.
  4. The poster should be the author of the code and describe what it does as part of the question.
History
Why does this post require moderator attention?
You might want to add some details to your flag.

1 comment thread

General comments (4 comments)
General comments
jrh‭ wrote over 3 years ago · edited over 3 years ago

I kind of think a new site for just CR might be better. IMO, 1) you need new close reasons, and most of the existing ones shouldn't be used (e.g., dupe close shouldn't happen), 2) research effort should probably not be a downvote reason (otherwise it might turn into "-1 because you didn't read / don't agree with Joe's blog about code style"), 3) CRs shouldn't generally be required to be useful for future visitors, though they might end up being useful.

Lundin‭ wrote over 3 years ago

@jrh I would agree that a site of its own would be ideal, when we can gather the user base for it. Which we can't currently, we can't even gather enough for general programming Q&A. We shouldn't open up ghost town communities, so the idea is to host code review as a category here for now, then let it spawn off into a community of its own when/if it gets enough users to support it.

Lundin‭ wrote over 3 years ago

@‭jrh‭ As for close reasons, maybe we should bring that up on general meta as a feature request and discuss a close vote mechanism that gives category-specific reasons? So that when you close vote a post in the Code review category, you get Code review-specific close reasons only.

Monica Cellio‭ wrote over 3 years ago

Right now close reasons are per-community, not per-community-per-category. We could adopt a convention like "[CR] reason" and "[Q&A] reason" for the ones that are unique to a category, until category-specific reasons are possible.