[HN Gopher] How often do people copy and paste from Stack Overflow? ___________________________________________________________________ How often do people copy and paste from Stack Overflow? Author : prakhargurunani Score : 87 points Date : 2021-04-19 16:15 UTC (6 hours ago) (HTM) web link (stackoverflow.blog) (TXT) w3m dump (stackoverflow.blog) | busterarm wrote: | I once had a brief contract helping out a two-person Rails | consultancy where pretty much all they did was follow RailsCasts. | | They got very angry at me several times for not doing things "the | Rails way". We were on Rails 4, which I already had loads of | experience with. The RailsCasts they were following were written | for Rails 2. They literally had no idea all of the ways Rails had | moved on between those versions. | | Their codebase was an absolute mess as well. This was an | application that was supposed to contain medical records and it | had broken routes that were leaking data everywhere | unauthenticated. And they were mad that I spent two weeks | cleaning all of that up and bulletproofing their application. | | I was happy to move on from that one, but it taught me a lesson | about just how valuable sales skills are. These two people were | living a comfortable lifestyle off a single paying client | (essentially getting money indirectly through DARPA) and were | punching way above their weight technically. | spaetzleesser wrote: | With the right connections you can have a very comfortable life | with receiving grants from DARPA. I used to work for a startup | founded by ex DARPA guys and it quickly showed that there was | an insider club of current and former DARPA people that lived | off grants. | busterarm wrote: | I 110% believe you :D | piokoch wrote: | Why "government founded grants", "medical software", | "incompetence", "very profitable" and "data leaks" are always | magically joined together... | busterarm wrote: | It gets much more interesting than that... | | The field itself is a poorly understood area of medicine. By | that I mean, it's only about 50 years old and no two doctors | practice alike. | | It's science, but nobody has consistent repeatable steps that | seem to be conclusive beyond their own individual labs. The | treatments are extraordinarily expensive. | | I'll leave it at that because I'd prefer not to give | identifying details (even though I basically have), but | really the whole thing was eye-opening for me. | elpakal wrote: | How about a GitHub Action which scans lines of code in a PR patch | for exact matches on SO? As a reviewer it would be helpful to see | 1) was copy pasta 2) what SO comments say about the code (eg has | it broken) | vmception wrote: | Its one thing when you need to remember how to make a GET request | with a certain framework, you can copy and paste that answer, its | another thing when you need to integrate the request into your | asynchronous queue and store the results in an ORM with JSON | serialization, cant copy and paste that | TruthWillHurt wrote: | "We pretty much captured everything except the actual text being | copied." | | Didn't realize I need to browse Stack Overflow in incognito | mode... | dkersten wrote: | Interestingly, I don't remember when the last time I did so was. | I seem to be relying on SO less and less. I do sometimes use it | as a quick reference, usually because its one of the first | results on search engines, but its typically just a quick "ah, | that's the function for that" or "ah, that's how you do X" rather | than actually copying code. | | I'm trying to think what's changed, I guess I've just been | writing stuff that either I'm super comfortable with or is niche | enough that there's not that much on SO that's helpful. Looking | in my browser history, the last thing I looked for that I got an | answer on SO is what's the differences between C++'s | std::scoped_lock and std::unique_lock, which was a few days ago. | I still use SO, just not as frequently as a few years ago. | Silhouette wrote: | _I 'm trying to think what's changed_ | | Among other possibilities: | | SO suffers from hostile moderation and a generally unwelcoming | culture, perhaps even worse than Wikipedia. This has a profound | chilling effect on positive, substantial contributions, | particularly from new contributors. | | SO had a great strategy initially with relying on search | engines to index everything, but it never seems to have solved | the recency/relevance problem. In that respect, it has become | its own worst enemy, with old answers about obsolete versions | and practices often ranking highly in search results. | | The first of those problems then exacerbates the second, | because the same cultural issues get in the way of both | updating answers to old questions and asking new questions that | might be superficially similar to ones that already exist but | actually need a different answer. | | Meanwhile, in many areas of programming, documentation from | other sources has become both better in quality and more | readily located thanks to other well-known sites and high | search engine rankings. Relatively speaking, SO simply isn't as | useful if there is already primary documentation that answers | questions correctly and comprehensively. | | And finally, you personally may have grown as a developer over | time, becoming both more capable of solving problems for | yourself and more familiar with whatever tools you use | regularly, so you might not need external help so often. | | FWIW, I'm also in the "rarely visit SO any more" camp. I think | I have a kind of banner blindness for SO hits on search results | pages now, perhaps because I'm assuming that following a SO | link is unlikely to provide a useful answer so I almost always | check other plausible sources first. On those occasions when I | do get as far as visiting SO, I'm usually reminded of why I | tend to work this way now. | [deleted] | fredley wrote: | I have spent multiple hours digging into something, found _my own | Stack Overflow answer_ and pasted it back in. | water8 wrote: | Why did you spend hours digging into something you already knew | the answer to? | ASalazarMX wrote: | Solving a problem once doesn't guarantee it's added to your | knowledge. Learning needs repetition, if you solve that | problem once a year, you'll learn it very slowly. | rolisz wrote: | They didn't know it any longer. They are using StackOverflow | as a second brain, offloading knowledge to it. | ralusek wrote: | Pensieve. | daveidol wrote: | Knowing something at some point in the past does not mean you | currently remember it! | Kranar wrote: | Because "knew" is past tense. There are a lot of things that | I once "knew" but no longer "know", and it's nice when that | past knowledge is documented somewhere. | zeta0134 wrote: | Not OP, but... more often than I care to admit, _past me_ is | perfectly aware of the answer to this problem, but _present | me_ has long since forgotten. | nmg wrote: | I do this with documents and help articles I've published. | "Here, let me show you how to do this." 6 mos later: "How the | heck did I do that?... oh yeah. That makes sense, neat." | HeyLaughingBoy wrote: | What's worse is when you find your own answer and don't even | remember writing it! | nitrogen wrote: | Worse still is finding entire old projects with your name on | them and not remembering them at all. | danaris wrote: | Personally, I try not to copy & paste things I don't understand-- | unless there's not enough information around the code to explain | it, in which case I first copy & paste it, then tweak it and test | it enough that I _do_ understand it. | kemiller2002 wrote: | Ha! Joke's on them. I type it out so it makes it look like I'm | doing more work. (But in all seriousness, I normally do type it | out, so it forces me to remember what I'm using better.) | niix wrote: | Same, I've always done this for anything like this (i.e. | tutorials), just to make sure what I'm learning sticks with me | a bit more. | TameAntelope wrote: | Right? Who is _literally_ copy /pasting, that seems dangerous. | | I'd describe it as learning the concept/tactic/technique from | the SO answer, and if me then implementing that | concept/tactic/technique in my own code just so happens to look | the same as the provided example, that's fine. | | Frequently it doesn't, either! | mhb wrote: | The learning works better if you cut and paste it twice, forget | to change something and then discover it after a few hours of | debugging. | p4l4g4 wrote: | This, yes! Not necessarily the copy/paste part, but | definitely the debug part! | | I generally like deeper debug sessions, preferably without | too much pressure. Getting deep understanding for a problem | and figuring out a solution were the most valuable learning | experiences in my career. The satisfaction you get from | finding a solution to a hard problem, makes them more | memorable. Even if the lessons learned afterward are not | spectacular, then at least you got a chance to sharpen the | tools in your belt to pin point problems as they occur! | kemiller wrote: | Well, hello, Junior. That's thinking! | kemiller2002 wrote: | Ha! Nice username :) | arduinomancer wrote: | IMO its not even that we're copying people's logic, its just that | stack overflow acts as a weird sort of crowd-sourced centralized | documentation for programming languages. | | For example if I forget the name of a function for something in a | particular language I don't even go to the docs, I just google | something like "python reverse list" and click the first SO link. | davnicwil wrote: | Just in case this idea needed any more validation, a few years | ago Stackoverflow _themselves_ launched a 'Stackoverflow for | Documentation' product [0], and eventually shut it down | because, as was probably obvious to many going in and certainly | in retrospect, this product was of course.. just Stackoverflow. | | [0] | https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/354217/sunsetting-d... | ASalazarMX wrote: | It's a shame that most manuals have evolved to web pages that | you can't download as PDFs or eBooks. Now you usually have to | go online to find that keyword, and as you're online already, | might as well google for the whole answer. | | One of the most productive times in my career was programming | for the IBM i in the 90s. There were manuals online, but you | could also download indexed PDFs versions. IBM did a superb job | with their documentation, there was hardly any need to look up | anything in the Internet, whatever you needed was in the | manuals, examples included. | | Of course you still used the Internet at work, but mostly for | mingling with your peers and having technical discussions, | although too many people still blindly copied/pasted from the | forums. | ralusek wrote: | That's interesting that you say that because I actually have | the opposite reaction. When I go to look for documentation | and find that it's a PDF, I want to die. | ASalazarMX wrote: | PDFs are horrible as eBooks, but in a manual I prefer the | fidelity of a PDF than the reflowing of an ePUB, or the | fickleness, slowness, and potential unavailability of a web | page. | | A well structured and correctly indexed PDF is a godsend, | because you just open the table of contents, quickly locate | what you're looking for, click and there is your answer. As | I said, IBM excels at writing documentation. Every language | has a Language Reference manual, and a Programmer's Guide | manual. The first is for reference, the second is to learn | how to use it, including examples. | | Don't take my word for it, you can check out, for example, | the COBOL manuals here: | https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/i/7.1?topic=languages-cobol | afiori wrote: | for this specific use case a single html file that you | open in the browser might be the best option (at least | php offer that option and I appreciated it). | ghaff wrote: | I think it depends. For something well-structured like a | cookbook I'd prefer PDF in most cases. But it really | varies. For example I find most guidebooks do a decent | job of Kindle these days and have actually switched over | to a significant degree because it's really useful to | have everything on my phone. | agallant wrote: | You may be interested in https://devdocs.io (offline-friendly | documentation tool). And if you prefer a straight up desktop | app - https://zealdocs.org | milkytron wrote: | I also really enjoyed Dash when it was free to use: | https://kapeli.com/dash | jabo wrote: | Why not pay for it or get your employer to pay for it, | especially if you enjoyed it? | ASalazarMX wrote: | Thank you. I've used it, although it adds a lot of | complexity for the same features than a folder full of | manuals would give. | | I'm probably too set in my ways, but I prefer references | that are always available offline. Devdocs.io once in a | blue moon would forget about my choices, and I would hate | to redownload them. | simonsarris wrote: | I do this for <canvas> sometimes and get... myself in 2013 | answering somebody | QuesnayJr wrote: | This happens to me too. It freaks me out, because it means | that not only I forgot the answer, but that I forgot that I | ever knew the answer. | glitchcrab wrote: | Also been there, however mine was me answering my own | question. Several years later I helped myself out again with | it. | number6 wrote: | list.reverse() | henrikeh wrote: | Is it just me or is this also a symptom of Python's | documentation being really strange to navigate and generally | having a massive impedance mismatch with Google? | | When I search on Google for "python reverse list", not a single | link is to the official Python documentation. Not even if I | search for "python reverse" does the documentation page show | up. Searching for "python reverse documentation" leads to the | second link to the Build-in Functions page | (https://docs.python.org/3/library/functions.html), which is | what I "need". | | Excuse the comparison, but "matlab reverse list" has the top | three to the official documentation (all of them relevant, but | slightly different semantics). Why can't Python be better than | that? | klmadfejno wrote: | > When I search on Google for "python reverse list", not a | single link is to the official Python documentation. Not even | if I search for "python reverse" does the documentation page | show up. Searching for "python reverse documentation" leads | to the second link to the Build-in Functions page | (https://docs.python.org/3/library/functions.html), which is | what I "need". | | But what you want is probably ls[::-1] | [deleted] | nurpax wrote: | It's not just you. Python seems to suffer from Python- | specific "tutorial sites" being SEO'd above Python's official | docs. I don't know what it is about the Python documentation | that lowers its rank on Google search results. In general, | not a big fan of Python docs. | jbverschoor wrote: | "Back in the good old days", you'd get detailed documentation | with for example DirectX. The whole visual c++ experience was | so good. I never needed to look up anything. Browsing for | documentation is such a zone-exiter... | | Rails, Some gens, and some Java projects are the few properly | documented projects out there. | [deleted] | hannofcart wrote: | I have a hunch that this tendency to look up SO rather than | actual language/API docs is prevalent more in some ecosystems | than in others. | | For eg, with Rust and Go projects I would invariably read the | actual docs (which I find are very accessible to read) as | compared to when I write Python or C++ where I'm happy to SO my | way through my task. | | However, what I've found is that reading the actual docs is | better for multiple reasons: 1) it reinforces your learning / | memory via spaced repitition 2) you tend to glean some extra, | related useful info from the docs. | | These days I try and put myself in a no SO straitjacket as far | as possible, forcing myself to read the actual docs instead. | rualca wrote: | > (...) acts as a weird sort of crowd-sourced centralized | documentation for programming languages. | | I see it more as an expert system where problems and their | solutions are documented in a queriable way. | | What stack overflow offers is more than your run of the mill | documentation. It leaves a paper trail of weird corner cases | and their workarounds. | [deleted] | aejnsn wrote: | I did work for a small company whose "director of software | development" had copied and pasted verbatim basic details from SO | enough for it to become a theme. He would copy long, drawn-out, | language-level examples from SO rather than use the idiomatic, | syntactic sugar provided by the framework and its docs. The | duplication would drive me insane. | sneak wrote: | I think whatever feature in my browser lets websites determine | when I copy text should be ripped out, along with the site's | ability to snoop on my scroll position. | | The sandbox has been broken. | ev1 wrote: | I believe firefox lets you set | dom.event.clipboardevents.enabled => false | [deleted] | johjohjoh wrote: | Don't paste from stackoverflow and do not hire people who paste | from stackoverflow or anywhere online. This is literally how | software is compromised. I worked with people at another company | who had compromised a small part of Google and several banks this | way. They contacted the security department later but they were | surprised by the number of companies they were able to compromise | just by posting instructions online. | dvirsky wrote: | I would add - unless it's a very short snippet and you | understand exactly what it does. My top SO answer is how to | convert and IP address from string to integer representation in | Python. It's one or two lines, it's perfectly fine to copy that | sort of thing. I've actually copied my own code from SO on | several occasions. | ASalazarMX wrote: | > Don't paste from stackoverflow and do not hire people who | paste from stackoverflow or anywhere online | | Crucial corollary: "... that you don't understand". | | Blindly copy/pasting what you don't understand is the problem. | If it's too complex to analyze, it doesn't belong in Stack | Overflow. | joinmoin12 wrote: | Things started to become more interesting when we asked more | detailed questions about who was copying and what they were | copying. | | https://www.geogebra.org/resource/krdc3fxd/Ig5ImkxMQlMX4XvI/... | mattnewton wrote: | I don't think that link is what you meant to paste? | cratermoon wrote: | Often enough to inspire this: https://github.com/drathier/stack- | overflow-import | tomrod wrote: | This seems like a terrible idea! | [deleted] | flimflamm wrote: | This seems like a terrific joke! | PhillyG wrote: | I'm enjoying the license it uses: | | "This module is licensed under whatever license you want it | to be as long as the license is compatible with the fact | that I blatantly copied multiple lines of code from the | Python standard library" | SaltyBackendGuy wrote: | Thanks for sharing. This made my afternoon :) | tomrod wrote: | Indeed! | mixmastamyk wrote: | A terrible, horrible, _wonderful_ idea... | | (Kind of like one of the Grinch.) | nitwit005 wrote: | I'd be curious at the length distribution. I tend to copy search | terms (LongJavaClassNameThingy) to find some separate | documentation. | | I assume what's going on with the subset of high rep people that | do a lot of copying is they're doing searches for duplicate | posts. | [deleted] | cardanome wrote: | I think copy and pasting code is very useful for a junior | developer and nothing to be ashamed of. You will learn by | debugging and modifying it. | | As a more senior person, I rarely do copy whole snippets. I will | look for general inspiration or to confirm my idea and check if | there is a better solution. I wont blatantly copy as it rarely | fits into my architecture and code style so it is faster to just | directly write it how I need it. | LinuxBender wrote: | On a side note, use caution when doing a copy/paste from a | website into a terminal. There are several things you can do to | reduce the risk. Here [1] is a demo of one risk vector. The | article links back to a discussion here on HN from 2013 on some | things you can do to mitigate the risk. | | [1] - https://thejh.net/misc/website-terminal-copy-paste | lucb1e wrote: | In recent Bash versions this seems to have been fixed | (available in Debian Bullseye, currently the 'testing' branch): | when you paste something, it'll never auto-execute, even if it | contains newlines. | | It's actually quite annoying as I'll often copy from my | terminal itself, purposefully with the trailing newline, and it | now refuses to execute. I need to move my hand from mouse to | keyboard to hit enter and then (often) back to mouse. | Dragonai wrote: | Thanks for sharing this! | f154hfds wrote: | So I have copied this answer into probably 100 separate bash | scripts over the years: | | https://stackoverflow.com/a/246128/9084915 | | I've thought about saving it somewhere (sometimes I copy from my | other existing scripts) - but it's just too convenient to | google/copy directly out of the webpage. | lucb1e wrote: | That link goes to: | | > a useful one-liner which will give you the full directory | name of the script | | So we don't all have to click to find out what this is about... | math-dev wrote: | All Day, Everyday. | | (p.s. SO Blog is really cool - they always post many good and | informative articles there). | nathias wrote: | I have copied the code one time in 2 years, but I ended up | heavily modifying and then refactoring anyway ... | rriepe wrote: | _copy and paste find and replace | | those are fine, but use a tab not a space | | CTRL shift L or I'm in hell | | but please, don't merge my rebase_ | podiki wrote: | ....I have lots of questions about this "homegrown web tracking | tool" (assuming this isn't still part of a joke?). What??? Was | this opt-in? Did they track across everyone? What was collected? | This is troubling, to say the least. | somehnguy wrote: | Serious question: why is this troubling? | | I don't see the big deal, at all. This is absolutely nothing | compared to what big advertising & social media do. Taking a | count of people who hit ctr+c? Who cares, I can't see any | possible scenario of how that data could be used in a bad way | unless you think SO is going to email employers with a time | spent & ctrl+c count or something? | cryptoz wrote: | Not OP, but, the troubling parts for me are 1) the tone of | the post, and 2) the larger-than-SO issue of the gap in | understanding copy+paste for the average user. | | 1) The post says "unfortunately" they cannot tie logged-out | users to their logged-in account. In no moral way is this a | reasonable perspective to me. It is _extremely_ fortunate | that SO does not build the tech to track you as a logged-in | user when you are logged out. That 's a bad precedent to set. | Sure, some sites do that, but I think they shouldn't. | | Other examples of the tone in the article abound. It's | troubling for sure. | | 2) It is up to the web devs themselves to decide what goes in | your clipboard. Many users don't know this. Sites that | exploit the gap between user expectation of privacy while | copy+paste as well as tracking do not match with reality. | Stack Overflow is merely one of many players here, but they | way they exploit this gap is mildly upsetting. | | Something needs to be done, either technically or | communication to users, about copy+paste reality. | somehnguy wrote: | Thanks for the explanation. Honestly I still don't see the | big deal though. It's just a little bit of fun with an | interesting statistic, not everything needs to be so doom & | gloom serious. | podiki wrote: | I wasn't trying to be all "doom and gloom," but as one | concerned about tracking (yes, all the social media and | stuff you mention, which I try to be very conscious | about) the casual mention of adding in tracking to a | particular event really could have used more context and | explanation (especially given the technical audience). I | love see the data analysis on SO, but there is a general | need for transparency and opt-in on the internet. Not | saying this was a huge deal, but the fact that it can be | so casual speaks to the larger issues I'd say. | benpopper1 wrote: | Hey there - I work at SO. Understand your concern and wanted to | share some details. | | Browsers fire a copy event when you copy, just like a click | event fires when you press on a button. We just added analytics | to it like we would any other feature on the site. | | We didn't track the content of your copy (browsers don't let | you see the text content) but we did track the following: | | Meta data about the post and it's parent post like the id, | owner, score, tags, if it was a question/answer, if it was | accepted | | If your copy was from a code block or from text content | | The Referer header | | Standard analytics properties like the date/time, approximated | location, account metadata | | Here's our privacy policy on analytics: "Analytics information | Stack Overflow uses data analytics to ensure site functionality | and to optimize our Product and Service offerings to you. We | use web browser and mobile analytics to allow us to understand | Network and Apps functionality. In doing so, we record | information including, for example how often you visit the | Network, how often you contribute content, Network and Apps | performance data, errors and debugging information, and the | type of activity you engage in while on the Network or in your | use of our Products and Services. We may on occasion share this | information with third parties for research or product and | services optimization." | quesera wrote: | > Browsers fire a copy event when you copy, just like a click | event fires when you press on a button. We just added | analytics to it like we would any other feature on the site. | | This is a bit misleading. | | More accurate would be: Stack Overflow is able to configure | our web pages to track certain of your activities on the | page, including Copy and Click. We do that. | podiki wrote: | I appreciate the response and detail here, would have liked | to see that in the original post. | ianmcgowan wrote: | I do it all the time for clever tricks (especially SQL things | like tally tables), but like to leave the permalink to the answer | that seems best (from the share link below the answers) as a | comment in my code. | | If it's something I had to google for once, it's likely needed in | the future and sometimes it's easier to search my own code for | all SO links than follow the thread through the labyrinth | again... | shpx wrote: | Stack Overflow answers are licensed under a CC BY-SA | license.[0] If you copy and paste a function without (at least) | linking to the question, isn't that copyright infringement? | | [0] https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/333089/ | lucb1e wrote: | That depends on various factors. Without doing a copyright | law for dummies, the short of it is that a few lines are | often not copyrightable at all, but otherwise yes. Hence, in | my code I actually link to the answer when I re-use a | function (one example that comes to mind is a string->number | hash function in javascript to assign random but consistent | colors to items). | tabtab wrote: | If terrorists really wanted to disrupt civilization, then S.O. | would be a prime target. I'm just the messenger, shore it up, | you've been warned. I'd estimate it solves at least 1/3 of the | glitches I encounter from day to day. | | That being said, I can't stand their all-or-nothing moderating. | Let low-rated messages exist, but be hidden by default, similar | to Slashdot and Reddit. | spaetzleesser wrote: | I never copy/paste directly but I try to understand what's going | on. It seems there are two kinds of devs: some that just want | things get done and others what want to understand. The people | who just want get things done will probably be happy copying some | code verbatim. | metalforever wrote: | This is an unpopular opinion but I think the answer to this may | depend on the age of the engineer. | | For example, I learned programming before stack overflow. I have | most of the standard library syntax in my head and mostly look at | spec documents. Once in a great while I will go on stack overflow | if I can't debug a problem but I don't post on there . | | In the same way, I suspect some engineers like using video to | learn things or debug things but it's not for me. | HeyLaughingBoy wrote: | Possibly, but I don't know where the inflection point lies. | | Before StackOverflow was a "thing," I recall noticing that it | was easier to google spec documents on an electronic component | even though I had the manufacturer's databook and Application | Notes just across the room. | | The ease of searching the pdf on google outweighed the ease of | getting up and paging through the physical book. The main | difference was in Application Notes: I could sit down and read | some of the better ones like a novel (I'm looking at you, | Analog Devices :-) and that was easier with the dead tree copy | than the online one. | buro9 wrote: | This is probably true. Having lived without the ability to | search any random problem and have a snippet of code there, I'm | used to searching for academic papers, RFCs, or reference | documentation and then build up my understanding and make an | implementation that way. | | There are times that I've not done this though, for example a | couple of years ago I was struggling to comprehend how to | convert some math from a paper into actual code (the symbols | were more than a little odd and I swear a bit of the equation | was missing) and yet searching Github revealed a repo where | someone had produced snippets of different obscure algorithms. | Not quite a cut and paste, but definitely a "read the answer". | djbeadle wrote: | My secret move when I'm having trouble setting up a new | library or dependency is to search for some common code from | it on Github. | | For example, how do I use the Python requests library (bad | example because it has great documentation) would lead me to | searching "import requests". | paxys wrote: | It's less about age and more about the stack you work with. I | know several experienced engineers who have the entire Java | library memorized, but have them work on a slightly different | stack (or even a newer SDK version) and they will be blindly | Googling for answers like anyone else. | P_I_Staker wrote: | "Kids these days" | mixmastamyk wrote: | Sometimes you want a discussion of the pros and cons of the | various ways to tackle a problem, in order to find the best | approach for your application. | | This kind of information is almost never in standard | documentation. | ketzo wrote: | Yep. There's nothing quite like the experience of going on | Stack Overflow for a particular problem, and the "best | answer" is _almost_ what you need... | | but you scroll down, and there's a different version that's | _exactly_ what you need! except it 's for an older version of | the library... | | but there's a comment on _that_ answer, from two years later, | with a quick note on "if you're at version 7+, just do Y | instead of X." | | Absolutely wonderful. | chovybizzass wrote: | I look for the clearest, cleanest shortest solution and then I | make it better. | nynx wrote: | I've found that the amount I use stackoverflow is inversely | proportional to the quality of the documentation of the language | I'm using. | lucb1e wrote: | Definitely. Looking at my browser history for stackoverflow + | PHP, it seems to be things to do _with_ PHP, such as how to | prevent a referrer from being sent when users click a link on | my website. That 's of course not actually part of the PHP | language, so it would seem like I'm rarely looking up how to | use PHP APIs on stackoverflow. I've always found PHP docs to be | the best of any language that I've used. | chenster wrote: | Pastegrammer | exhilaration wrote: | One of the interview questions I ask is, "if you run in a problem | you can't solve, where do you go online to find answers?" Anyone | that doesn't answer Stack Overflow is - in my opinion - either | lying or very, very new to the industry. (This is for .Net/C# | jobs so maybe it's different for other languages.) | reidrac wrote: | Searching online to find help to solve a problem doesn't equal | to use Stack Overflow, at least in my experience. | | It may be the type of problems, but I can't even remember the | last time that DDG took me to SO and it was actually the answer | that I was looking for. | | I think I've found more answers searching for open issues in GH | than anything else. | MrOxiMoron wrote: | to be honest, I use my search engine of choice, yes stack | overflow often comes up in the results, but also GitHub issues | of people having a similar issue, often for other projects that | use the same tools/libraries I do. | | so I go to my search engine for answers, not stack overflow | directly. | lostcolony wrote: | Yeah. I'd raise an eyebrow at Stack Overflow if they didn't | also include Google. Google will get me official API docs, | blog posts diving in deep about it, Github issues, as you | say, -as well as- anything relevant on Stack Overflow. | | Maybe they meant to go -ask- questions? Which...I rarely ever | do, despite being in this game for over a decade. The few | times no one has asked the question I have, it usually has to | do with a library or missing functionality, and that tends to | get resolved (at least with an answer of "yeah, that isn't | supported") via an email. | bryanrasmussen wrote: | right, often if it is a particular error message Github | issues for the library and version you're using is more | useful. | sergiotapia wrote: | Eh depends on the language. For elixir I go to the elixirforum | not stackoverflow | busterarm wrote: | I've been in this industry around 20 years and I can't remember | the last time I looked at SO to answer one of my own questions. | Other people's, sure, but usually I look at the source code for | answers to my questions. | | The results are more consistent. | | Now Github Issues on the other hand... | mgkimsal wrote: | 1. web search (google/bing/ddg) - often that will lead to SO, | but also turn up some other relevant forums. | | 2. docs on package X. If I'm reasonably certain a problem is | with a specific package, I'll search for a forum or issue | tracker (often GitHub) for that package. | | 3. language-specific community. there are some lang-spec | sites/forums that help with the nitty-gritty sometimes that SO | and similar sites don't always get (or, more often, SO is out | of date but still marked 'best'). | | That SO often tends to be where you end up doesn't, imo, mean | you should always start there. If the same SO links are at the | top of many search engines, that's probably a very good | indicator, but you almost always need to broaden out when | researching. | sumtechguy wrote: | and lord help you when you are on page 6 of a google search | and not finding it... :( | bckr wrote: | I would take that as evidence that I'm not doing something | common, which is soft evidence that I'm not doing it the | right way. I haven't had to do anything really novel, | mostly I just have to do various forms of plumbing. | scaladev wrote: | Why would I go to Stack Overflow? If it has any decent answers, | they'll be right at the top of Google (or whatever) search | results. If it doesn't, I just saved myself the need to do a | second search. | methodin wrote: | Search is the only correct answer. SO may be the first click | often but limiting your problem solving to that is not | something an experienced dev will do. | bryanrasmussen wrote: | it really depends on the severity/depth/weirdness of the | problem. I often run into things I don't know the names of or | need documentation for how to do with a particular | library/framework, those almost end up being solved on Stack | Overflow - if I actually have a problem that I cannot 'solve', | Stack Overflow is almost never actually helpful (some times it | helps to try to write out a question that is clear enough for | Stack Overflow to accept, because then you might think of what | you actually have to research) | Lichtso wrote: | I disagree. From your perspective I must be a liar, and that is | fine by me. | | As, I can't recall the last time I found anything helpful on | that platform, that any of my questions were actually answered | and certainly not that I copied & pasted any code. I am not | claiming that it never happened. It is just so rare that I | wouldn't answer your interview question that way. To me that | platform is an internet points farm combined with Groundhog Day | of basic questions. I might be an extreme outlier of our craft. | Just keep in mind that we exist and that not everybody | answering the question "incorrectly" is a liar or an idiot. In | fact, I would say that only those candidates who answer | differently are truly interesting. | sys_64738 wrote: | It's often faster to google on stack overflow for python code | than write it yourself. ___________________________________________________________________ (page generated 2021-04-19 23:00 UTC)