[comp.graphics] Constructive vs. destructive postings

DSeal@acorn.co.uk (05/03/90)

In article <2399@crash.cts.com>, jcs@crash.cts.com (John Schultz) writes:

> ...
>   I spend a great deal of time trying to give out information that I
> feel others might need, in a useable format.  Postings that point out
> that our solutions are simply incorrect, do not really help the 
> situation, especially for students, or anyone trying to learn.
>   Postings that point out specific errors and/or fixes, are greatly
> appreciated by all and help push the problem through the error space
> to the solution. I hope others feel the same way.

I agree with John that constructive articles are the most helpful. But
sometimes people don't know a correct solution to a problem: they merely
know that a posted solution is wrong - e.g. because they have a simple
counterexample to it.

I find postings that simply point out such erroneous solutions are still
valuable, because:

(a) I may be relying (incorrectly) on the posted solution in something I've
    written. Anything that helps me find out why my code isn't working is
    very useful!

(b) It prompts people to find the correct solution. If nobody knows the
    posted solution is wrong, no-one is going to look for a better answer!

So please try to make postings as constructive as possible, but don't be put
off by John's remarks from posting counterexamples, etc.

David Seal                           dseal@acorn.co.uk
Acorn Computers Ltd.,
Fulbourn Road,
Cambridge CB1 4JN,
U.K.

<include standard disclaimers>