7
$\begingroup$

I just saw this question.

It's actually quite a good question in terms of relating to on-topic questions (being about implementation of error messages) and it has 2 answers, both of which are good-quality. It even goes so far as to point out differences between the question and a related question. The only problem is that it's opinion-based/philosophical, so it's closed now.

The problem is, this was actually quite a well-thought-out question. The answers provided are quite useful, despite being opinion-based. Should PLDI be prepared to accommodate questions similar to this one, or should we try to rewrite the question into a more pros-cons format?

$\endgroup$

3 Answers 3

5
$\begingroup$

I think this question is empirically answerable with experience of implementing and deploying such errors in a language, and should be reopened. It may not get those answers yet (and hasn't), but it's certainly in scope and it's answerable.

There is an opinion-based element to what someone considers "worth their weight", but factual evidence is available of the impacts, and the implementation difficulty, that would allow someone to make their own assessment relative to their situation.

A more limited scope of question could be helpful, because it is fairly broad. For example, In what sort of language? For what audience? In comparison to implementing what instead? Such a question is more useful than another list of guesses and can be answered with evidence.

$\endgroup$
4
$\begingroup$

Given that the answer is:

It depends on the audience for your language

I believe such questions should be accepted if they are reworded to target a specific audience for the language and/or to be answered with facts rather than opinions, such as 'What would it take to add this type of compiler message?' or similar.

$\endgroup$
4
$\begingroup$

Question author here. Howdy!

I've submitted an edit that adds an extra paragraph that should hopefully address the concerns listed here. Please let me know if that's not sufficient enough to meet site requirements.

I greatly appreciate the discussion that y'all had and the advice that your answers had in order to make this acceptable for the site. I know we're still in early stages, but drawing the lines between what is primarily opinion-based and what's an acceptable level of opinion-based is important even as early as PLDI is.

$\endgroup$

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .