articles
-
Hi, I have some code i'm considering sharing. I'm not sure though, if it's 1)completely bug free (So far so good) and 2)if the world has need of it. I don't feel like being flamed because others feel my coding is bad or I'm re-inventing the wheel. How do you determin if your code is good enough to write an article? tnx. "If I don't see you in this world, I'll see you in the next one... and don't be late." ~ Jimi Hendrix
-
Hi, I have some code i'm considering sharing. I'm not sure though, if it's 1)completely bug free (So far so good) and 2)if the world has need of it. I don't feel like being flamed because others feel my coding is bad or I'm re-inventing the wheel. How do you determin if your code is good enough to write an article? tnx. "If I don't see you in this world, I'll see you in the next one... and don't be late." ~ Jimi Hendrix
V. wrote: How do you determine if your code is good enough to write an article? I write the code to the best of my abilities. I have often received excellent "peer review" comments from people that then look at my code and ask "why didn't you do it this way?" An excellent example is an article I write demonstrating how to emit a break statement in IL when there's a perfectly good System.Diagnostics.Debugger.Break() method, which I didn't know about. Oops! If you are solving an old problem with a different twist, or if you've only found C++ examples and there aren't any C# examples, etc., then an article might be valid. You might want to read this article though.[^] :-D Marc MyXaml Advanced Unit Testing YAPO
-
Hi, I have some code i'm considering sharing. I'm not sure though, if it's 1)completely bug free (So far so good) and 2)if the world has need of it. I don't feel like being flamed because others feel my coding is bad or I'm re-inventing the wheel. How do you determin if your code is good enough to write an article? tnx. "If I don't see you in this world, I'll see you in the next one... and don't be late." ~ Jimi Hendrix
I'm sure there are lots of people who would like to share but feel that same way you do. I've often thought that we need to set-up a group of people who volunteer to read articles before they are posted. So people like yourself can get a constructive view of the code and article before it is posted. These article readers could also help proof-read the text to ensure there is no silly English language errors that often make a good article seem poor. Of course this is probably the kind of role that Chris originally envisaged for the full-time editors to perform on articles that go via the submit@codeproject.com process rather than the submission wizard. However due to the quantity of the articles, this has never really been possible (and probably never would be) A peer-review before posting would be a good idea in theory , although I haven't really got a clue on how it could actually be implemented. Michael CP Blog [^] Development Blog [^]
-
I'm sure there are lots of people who would like to share but feel that same way you do. I've often thought that we need to set-up a group of people who volunteer to read articles before they are posted. So people like yourself can get a constructive view of the code and article before it is posted. These article readers could also help proof-read the text to ensure there is no silly English language errors that often make a good article seem poor. Of course this is probably the kind of role that Chris originally envisaged for the full-time editors to perform on articles that go via the submit@codeproject.com process rather than the submission wizard. However due to the quantity of the articles, this has never really been possible (and probably never would be) A peer-review before posting would be a good idea in theory , although I haven't really got a clue on how it could actually be implemented. Michael CP Blog [^] Development Blog [^]
Michael P Butler wrote: Of course this is probably the kind of role that Chris originally envisaged for the full-time editors to perform on articles that go via the submit@codeproject.com process rather than the submission wizard. However due to the quantity of the articles, this has never really been possible (and probably never would be) Frankly, I'm not sure the submission wizard turned out to be a good idea. It is just too easy to post junk articles now.
My programming blahblahblah blog. If you ever find anything useful here, please let me know to remove it.
-
V. wrote: How do you determine if your code is good enough to write an article? I write the code to the best of my abilities. I have often received excellent "peer review" comments from people that then look at my code and ask "why didn't you do it this way?" An excellent example is an article I write demonstrating how to emit a break statement in IL when there's a perfectly good System.Diagnostics.Debugger.Break() method, which I didn't know about. Oops! If you are solving an old problem with a different twist, or if you've only found C++ examples and there aren't any C# examples, etc., then an article might be valid. You might want to read this article though.[^] :-D Marc MyXaml Advanced Unit Testing YAPO
OK, I posted my article (via E-mail). It's small, modest and I probably did something wrong. Aah well, no pain, no gain (and I did mind my English and spelling :-)) tnx. "If I don't see you in this world, I'll see you in the next one... and don't be late." ~ Jimi Hendrix
-
I'm sure there are lots of people who would like to share but feel that same way you do. I've often thought that we need to set-up a group of people who volunteer to read articles before they are posted. So people like yourself can get a constructive view of the code and article before it is posted. These article readers could also help proof-read the text to ensure there is no silly English language errors that often make a good article seem poor. Of course this is probably the kind of role that Chris originally envisaged for the full-time editors to perform on articles that go via the submit@codeproject.com process rather than the submission wizard. However due to the quantity of the articles, this has never really been possible (and probably never would be) A peer-review before posting would be a good idea in theory , although I haven't really got a clue on how it could actually be implemented. Michael CP Blog [^] Development Blog [^]
OK, I posted my article (via E-mail). It's small, modest and I probably did something wrong. Aah well, no pain, no gain (but I did mind my English and spelling :-)) tnx. "If I don't see you in this world, I'll see you in the next one... and don't be late." ~ Jimi Hendrix
-
Hi, I have some code i'm considering sharing. I'm not sure though, if it's 1)completely bug free (So far so good) and 2)if the world has need of it. I don't feel like being flamed because others feel my coding is bad or I'm re-inventing the wheel. How do you determin if your code is good enough to write an article? tnx. "If I don't see you in this world, I'll see you in the next one... and don't be late." ~ Jimi Hendrix
Alot of the articles that people really comment poorly about or give 1 ratings to are the ones that there is no article. They post a zip and a paragraph that basically says to look at the code. Make sure to explain things in the article. Pretend that you are going to stand up in from of a class or a room of managers and the article is what you are presenting to them. There are also a few people that would look them over for you if you are nervous about it. Steve Maier, MCSD MCAD
-
I'm sure there are lots of people who would like to share but feel that same way you do. I've often thought that we need to set-up a group of people who volunteer to read articles before they are posted. So people like yourself can get a constructive view of the code and article before it is posted. These article readers could also help proof-read the text to ensure there is no silly English language errors that often make a good article seem poor. Of course this is probably the kind of role that Chris originally envisaged for the full-time editors to perform on articles that go via the submit@codeproject.com process rather than the submission wizard. However due to the quantity of the articles, this has never really been possible (and probably never would be) A peer-review before posting would be a good idea in theory , although I haven't really got a clue on how it could actually be implemented. Michael CP Blog [^] Development Blog [^]
I like the idea of having a kind of preliminary review stage, wouldn't be a bad way of getting the article quality up. How about having some kind of rotating system where people could volunteer to be involved as reviewers: they receive an email about an article in their given area of knowledge/expertise that's just been posted. They then maybe get to view it on a temporary page, post comments (as with current articles) and maybe get to vote on whether it should be approved. I personally would be happy to volunteer and perform some kind of article review, and would be happy (when posting) to have my articles subject to a peer review, if anything, it could prove to be extremely beneficial from my point-of-view as an author. By ensuring that areas have a suitably high number of volunteer editor/approvers, it would take the pressure of individuals from spending an extremely large amount of time reviewing everything. -- Paul "Put the key of despair into the lock of apathy. Turn the knob of mediocrity slowly and open the gates of despondency - welcome to a day in the average office." - David Brent, from "The Office" MS Messenger: paul@oobaloo.co.uk Download my PGP public key
-
I like the idea of having a kind of preliminary review stage, wouldn't be a bad way of getting the article quality up. How about having some kind of rotating system where people could volunteer to be involved as reviewers: they receive an email about an article in their given area of knowledge/expertise that's just been posted. They then maybe get to view it on a temporary page, post comments (as with current articles) and maybe get to vote on whether it should be approved. I personally would be happy to volunteer and perform some kind of article review, and would be happy (when posting) to have my articles subject to a peer review, if anything, it could prove to be extremely beneficial from my point-of-view as an author. By ensuring that areas have a suitably high number of volunteer editor/approvers, it would take the pressure of individuals from spending an extremely large amount of time reviewing everything. -- Paul "Put the key of despair into the lock of apathy. Turn the knob of mediocrity slowly and open the gates of despondency - welcome to a day in the average office." - David Brent, from "The Office" MS Messenger: paul@oobaloo.co.uk Download my PGP public key
Paul Ingles wrote: How about having some kind of rotating system where people could volunteer to be involved as reviewers [...] Now THAT is a good idea... Although I think it would require some (decent?) amount of changes to the site to implement this "review arena"... Peace! -=- James
If you think it costs a lot to do it right, just wait until you find out how much it costs to do it wrong!
Tip for new SUV drivers: Professional Driver on Closed Course does not mean your Dumb Ass on a Public Road!
DeleteFXPFiles & CheckFavorites -
Michael P Butler wrote: Of course this is probably the kind of role that Chris originally envisaged for the full-time editors to perform on articles that go via the submit@codeproject.com process rather than the submission wizard. However due to the quantity of the articles, this has never really been possible (and probably never would be) Frankly, I'm not sure the submission wizard turned out to be a good idea. It is just too easy to post junk articles now.
My programming blahblahblah blog. If you ever find anything useful here, please let me know to remove it.
Nemanja Trifunovic wrote: Frankly, I'm not sure the submission wizard turned out to be a good idea. It is just too easy to post junk articles now. Yeah, but the immediate gratification factor is great. It took two weeks for an article to show up on CodeGuru (yes, I went to the enemy once, only once, to test the waters). And the editors and the rest of us make quick work (chop-chop-chop!) of junk articles! :-D Marc MyXaml Advanced Unit Testing YAPO
-
Nemanja Trifunovic wrote: Frankly, I'm not sure the submission wizard turned out to be a good idea. It is just too easy to post junk articles now. Yeah, but the immediate gratification factor is great. It took two weeks for an article to show up on CodeGuru (yes, I went to the enemy once, only once, to test the waters). And the editors and the rest of us make quick work (chop-chop-chop!) of junk articles! :-D Marc MyXaml Advanced Unit Testing YAPO
Marc Clifton wrote: [...] CodeGuru (yes, I went to the enemy once, only once, to test the waters). Some of us would look upon that as "visiting the motherland"... :) Peace! -=- James
If you think it costs a lot to do it right, just wait until you find out how much it costs to do it wrong!
Tip for new SUV drivers: Professional Driver on Closed Course does not mean your Dumb Ass on a Public Road!
DeleteFXPFiles & CheckFavorites -
Marc Clifton wrote: [...] CodeGuru (yes, I went to the enemy once, only once, to test the waters). Some of us would look upon that as "visiting the motherland"... :) Peace! -=- James
If you think it costs a lot to do it right, just wait until you find out how much it costs to do it wrong!
Tip for new SUV drivers: Professional Driver on Closed Course does not mean your Dumb Ass on a Public Road!
DeleteFXPFiles & CheckFavoritesJames R. Twine wrote: Some of us would look upon that as "visiting the motherland"... Sort of like the colonists viewed visiting England in the 1700's, but now as Americans we view England as our ally (albeit a bit nutty ally)? ;P Marc MyXaml Advanced Unit Testing YAPO
-
Paul Ingles wrote: How about having some kind of rotating system where people could volunteer to be involved as reviewers [...] Now THAT is a good idea... Although I think it would require some (decent?) amount of changes to the site to implement this "review arena"... Peace! -=- James
If you think it costs a lot to do it right, just wait until you find out how much it costs to do it wrong!
Tip for new SUV drivers: Professional Driver on Closed Course does not mean your Dumb Ass on a Public Road!
DeleteFXPFiles & CheckFavoritesJames R. Twine wrote: require some (decent?) amount of changes Why? At simplest, we'd need a new "Arena" Category, where articles can be wizard-uploaded, commented on,wizard-updated, and wizard-removed before posting them to the "real" place". Another idea (more work) would be a "Arena" Subcategory (like the purgatory) for each Category, and a message board to "invite" Idea 3: Submission wizard has an "for review only" checkbox. The article is not listed publicly, but in the "My Articles" list, and the author can post/send the link at his own discretion. General problems: removing stale articles. Telling politely the whole article is crap (but I guess all-crap article writers won't ask) Finding enough Tutor-Types that refrain from turning everything into "it should be done how I would have done it"
I never really know a killer from a savior
boost your code || Fold With Us! || sighist | doxygen -
James R. Twine wrote: require some (decent?) amount of changes Why? At simplest, we'd need a new "Arena" Category, where articles can be wizard-uploaded, commented on,wizard-updated, and wizard-removed before posting them to the "real" place". Another idea (more work) would be a "Arena" Subcategory (like the purgatory) for each Category, and a message board to "invite" Idea 3: Submission wizard has an "for review only" checkbox. The article is not listed publicly, but in the "My Articles" list, and the author can post/send the link at his own discretion. General problems: removing stale articles. Telling politely the whole article is crap (but I guess all-crap article writers won't ask) Finding enough Tutor-Types that refrain from turning everything into "it should be done how I would have done it"
I never really know a killer from a savior
boost your code || Fold With Us! || sighist | doxygenI would definitely think some kind of area that keeps articles in the equivalent of pre-announcement purgatory would be a good way to go. peterchen wrote: Finding enough Tutor-Types that refrain from turning everything into "it should be done how I would have done it" I think some kind of voting system would be the best way -- i.e. provided it gets 2 yay votes etc., and people are free to recommend whatever at the bottom. I don't know though, you never know how these kind of social interactions occur until you actually put in place with people, but some kind of self-regulating system would be an interesting experiment. Anybody think its worth posting as a suggestion, perhaps to see if it could be put in on a trial-like basis as an attempt to limit the cruft that gets posted? :) -- Paul "Put the key of despair into the lock of apathy. Turn the knob of mediocrity slowly and open the gates of despondency - welcome to a day in the average office." - David Brent, from "The Office" MS Messenger: paul@oobaloo.co.uk Download my PGP public key
-
I like the idea of having a kind of preliminary review stage, wouldn't be a bad way of getting the article quality up. How about having some kind of rotating system where people could volunteer to be involved as reviewers: they receive an email about an article in their given area of knowledge/expertise that's just been posted. They then maybe get to view it on a temporary page, post comments (as with current articles) and maybe get to vote on whether it should be approved. I personally would be happy to volunteer and perform some kind of article review, and would be happy (when posting) to have my articles subject to a peer review, if anything, it could prove to be extremely beneficial from my point-of-view as an author. By ensuring that areas have a suitably high number of volunteer editor/approvers, it would take the pressure of individuals from spending an extremely large amount of time reviewing everything. -- Paul "Put the key of despair into the lock of apathy. Turn the knob of mediocrity slowly and open the gates of despondency - welcome to a day in the average office." - David Brent, from "The Office" MS Messenger: paul@oobaloo.co.uk Download my PGP public key
I honestly think the current system works fairly well... Yeah, there's junk posted, but it generally gets caught and deleted/voted into oblivion fairly quickly. I would like to see some changes to the "Latest Best Picks" section on the front page, though. I see nothing special about an article that has recieved only one vote, even if that vote happens to be a '5'. If it's still in the top-ten after 5-10 votes, yeah, that sounds like it's worth a look. But really, if an article gets 40 votes averaging '4' in the same time as another gets 10 votes averaging '4.5', i'd most likely rather see the first! Popularity would make a better selector, i think. I'd also love to see the "Last 10 updates" section split into 10 new articles, and 10 recent updates. With current ratings shown for the updated articles. I miss new articles frequently because they disappear from the front page - if i didn't read the newsletter, i'd miss them completely. And the page that lists all articles updated recently is so slow to load as to be pretty much useless. Maybe this is one of those things that would fit my needs and hamper everyone else... but i think they'd go a long way towards promoting truely excellent articles and damning the crud, without affecting the bits that currently work well.
Shog9
I'm not the Jack of Diamonds... I'm not the six of spades. I don't know what you thought; I'm not your astronaut...
-
I would definitely think some kind of area that keeps articles in the equivalent of pre-announcement purgatory would be a good way to go. peterchen wrote: Finding enough Tutor-Types that refrain from turning everything into "it should be done how I would have done it" I think some kind of voting system would be the best way -- i.e. provided it gets 2 yay votes etc., and people are free to recommend whatever at the bottom. I don't know though, you never know how these kind of social interactions occur until you actually put in place with people, but some kind of self-regulating system would be an interesting experiment. Anybody think its worth posting as a suggestion, perhaps to see if it could be put in on a trial-like basis as an attempt to limit the cruft that gets posted? :) -- Paul "Put the key of despair into the lock of apathy. Turn the knob of mediocrity slowly and open the gates of despondency - welcome to a day in the average office." - David Brent, from "The Office" MS Messenger: paul@oobaloo.co.uk Download my PGP public key
just did it[^] :cool:
I never really know a killer from a savior
boost your code || Fold With Us! || sighist | doxygen -
I honestly think the current system works fairly well... Yeah, there's junk posted, but it generally gets caught and deleted/voted into oblivion fairly quickly. I would like to see some changes to the "Latest Best Picks" section on the front page, though. I see nothing special about an article that has recieved only one vote, even if that vote happens to be a '5'. If it's still in the top-ten after 5-10 votes, yeah, that sounds like it's worth a look. But really, if an article gets 40 votes averaging '4' in the same time as another gets 10 votes averaging '4.5', i'd most likely rather see the first! Popularity would make a better selector, i think. I'd also love to see the "Last 10 updates" section split into 10 new articles, and 10 recent updates. With current ratings shown for the updated articles. I miss new articles frequently because they disappear from the front page - if i didn't read the newsletter, i'd miss them completely. And the page that lists all articles updated recently is so slow to load as to be pretty much useless. Maybe this is one of those things that would fit my needs and hamper everyone else... but i think they'd go a long way towards promoting truely excellent articles and damning the crud, without affecting the bits that currently work well.
Shog9
I'm not the Jack of Diamonds... I'm not the six of spades. I don't know what you thought; I'm not your astronaut...
Shog9 wrote: And the page that lists all articles updated recently is so slow to load as to be pretty much useless. Is it still slow? I've been working with Chris add a few indexes to the database that should be speeding things up, and the new database server is running rather well.
I can imagine the sinking feeling one would have after ordering my book, only to find a laughably ridiculous theory with demented logic once the book arrives - Mark McCutcheon
-
Shog9 wrote: And the page that lists all articles updated recently is so slow to load as to be pretty much useless. Is it still slow? I've been working with Chris add a few indexes to the database that should be speeding things up, and the new database server is running rather well.
I can imagine the sinking feeling one would have after ordering my book, only to find a laughably ridiculous theory with demented logic once the book arrives - Mark McCutcheon
andy brummer wrote: Is it still slow? Beautiful! I tried it earlier, and it timed out after about two minutes... now it loads almost instantly. Perhaps it's my proxy that has problems... :suss: Thanks :)
Shog9
I'm not the Jack of Diamonds... I'm not the six of spades. I don't know what you thought; I'm not your astronaut...
-
andy brummer wrote: Is it still slow? Beautiful! I tried it earlier, and it timed out after about two minutes... now it loads almost instantly. Perhaps it's my proxy that has problems... :suss: Thanks :)
Shog9
I'm not the Jack of Diamonds... I'm not the six of spades. I don't know what you thought; I'm not your astronaut...
The indexes were added over the past couple of weeks, so if you just saw a slow page then it was probably a momentary slowdown or a bandwidth issue.
I can imagine the sinking feeling one would have after ordering my book, only to find a laughably ridiculous theory with demented logic once the book arrives - Mark McCutcheon
-
James R. Twine wrote: require some (decent?) amount of changes Why? At simplest, we'd need a new "Arena" Category, where articles can be wizard-uploaded, commented on,wizard-updated, and wizard-removed before posting them to the "real" place". Another idea (more work) would be a "Arena" Subcategory (like the purgatory) for each Category, and a message board to "invite" Idea 3: Submission wizard has an "for review only" checkbox. The article is not listed publicly, but in the "My Articles" list, and the author can post/send the link at his own discretion. General problems: removing stale articles. Telling politely the whole article is crap (but I guess all-crap article writers won't ask) Finding enough Tutor-Types that refrain from turning everything into "it should be done how I would have done it"
I never really know a killer from a savior
boost your code || Fold With Us! || sighist | doxygenpeterchen wrote: Why? At simplest, we'd need a new "Arena" Category, where articles can be wizard-uploaded, commented on,wizard-updated, and wizard-removed before posting them to the "real" place". Because I was thinking of something a little more automated, like an "submission queue" and reviewers, or groups of reviewers would "pop" articles from the queue, review them, offer suggestions to the author where required, and then shuttle them to the appropriate section or reject them back to the submitter. Peace! -=- James
If you think it costs a lot to do it right, just wait until you find out how much it costs to do it wrong!
Tip for new SUV drivers: Professional Driver on Closed Course does not mean your Dumb Ass on a Public Road!
DeleteFXPFiles & CheckFavorites