Skip to main content
13 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Mar 16, 2017 at 16:03 history edited CommunityBot
replaced http://meta.codereview.stackexchange.com/ with https://codereview.meta.stackexchange.com/
Mar 16, 2017 at 16:03 history edited CommunityBot
replaced http://meta.codereview.stackexchange.com/ with https://codereview.meta.stackexchange.com/
May 20, 2015 at 13:23 history edited h.j.k. CC BY-SA 3.0
added 231 characters in body
May 20, 2015 at 12:31 comment added h.j.k. @nhgrif my edits for the second close reason was motivated by your first comment, so I thought I'll do my best to clarify that part as well.
May 20, 2015 at 12:29 comment added h.j.k. @nhgrif I tried to summarize my thoughts...
May 20, 2015 at 12:29 history edited h.j.k. CC BY-SA 3.0
added 391 characters in body
May 20, 2015 at 11:27 comment added nhgrif You keep tying unwritten back to broken though. You've done nothing to convince me that broken and unwritten should be under the same close reason. You answer talks more about the second close reason while this question is about the first close reason.
May 20, 2015 at 11:25 comment added h.j.k. @nhgrif see edit. :)
May 20, 2015 at 11:25 history edited h.j.k. CC BY-SA 3.0
added 1057 characters in body
May 20, 2015 at 10:31 comment added RubberDuck Although, "code not yet written" often falls under design questions in practicality. Perhaps that first close reason could be interpreted as our version of "Questions about X belong on Y."
May 20, 2015 at 10:28 comment added RubberDuck "code that does not do what it's meant to do is no better than code that's not written yet." ++ Yes. I think that's what we mean as well.
May 20, 2015 at 10:28 comment added nhgrif Then why shouldn't broken code and pseudocode be lumped together? How does unwritten code differ pseudocode, hypothetical code, and stub code? (Most particularly in the context of choosing a close reason.)
May 20, 2015 at 3:26 history answered h.j.k. CC BY-SA 3.0