in reply to RFC - How to ask...

But before you post it, take another step. Include (inside ... or ... tags) a minimal, compilable script that demonstrates your problem and sample data (input).
If the problem is that the script won't compile, this seems unnecessary harsh on the poster.

CountZero

A program should be light and agile, its subroutines connected like a string of pearls. The spirit and intent of the program should be retained throughout. There should be neither too little or too much, neither needless loops nor useless variables, neither lack of structure nor overwhelming rigidity." - The Tao of Programming, 4.1 - Geoffrey James

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: RFC - How to ask...
by ww (Archbishop) on Feb 14, 2009 at 16:44 UTC

    Good point. How about adding -- after "sample data (input)." -- the following?

    Of course, if your problem is that you can't get the script to compile, despite your best efforts -- perhaps because the error message doesn't make sense to you -- go ahead and post the section where strict tells you that you have an error (and, of course, the error message, verbatim).
[reply]
[d/l]

      If you want this to be really useful (seems unlikely, frankly), brevity is key. The code needs to "reproduce the problem".

      "This is a little long" *bing* large portion of audience reads no further.

      - tye        

[reply]

        Replace "that demonstrates your problem" with "that reproduces the problem" ?? Seems very reasonable to me.

        re "*bing*" -- that's probably true, and I will seek an alternate introduction... perhaps by s/This is ... scan it. It's/This is.../. (You may not really satisfied with that, either; neither am I.)

        Re the length -- well, maybe I should overcome the "laziness" I mentioned above, and do an initial Markup in the Monastery-like precis.

        Sometimes "brevity" !eq ("precision" | "comprehensiveness" | "actually helpful")

[reply]

In Section Meditations