I have this code for returning percentage of grades less than 60. But it doesn't result in the desired percent. Someone help me figure out what's wrong.
public float getPercentFailing(float[] grades) {
float sum= 0;
for (int i = 0; i < .6; i++) {
sum = sum + grades[i];
...
@AnnaLear Done. That's a duplicate several times over, but I'm not sure where a good source post is and I got distracted searching...so answer it is. :P
just wondering if anyone knows whether a feature has ever been considered that would allow someone who has answered and been selected by the OP as the best answer, but then decides he or she did not provide the best answer to indicate this in some way
I've seen a few discussions, but it's usually asked from the perspective of a third person (not the answerer), and/or the answer has also been upvoted (perhaps even more than other answers)
In my case, I am the third person, but the selected answer provider said explicitly in a comment that the OP should accept my answer because his was incorrect, so... idunno
It just seems to me that it would be nice for him to be able to click something that would just indicate that he disagrees with the selection: stackoverflow.com/questions/7820930/…
it might lighten the selected indicator and put a question mark over it - no recalculation of reputation or anything, just an indicator
If the poster of an accepted answer thinks his answer is wrong, he should delete his answer. If he thinks another one is better, he can update his answer or place a comment on his answer to highlight a better answer.
ah well - I think it would be a good feature, but it's one more thing to add to the complexity
it really only happens when the asker is new or almost never visits and doesn't care about the site
...at least doesn't care very much
not knowing about this site in particular, but being in web development, I would think it COULD be programmed by one person in a day or less, maybe a few more for testing(?)
you've got the graphics (fairly simple), the code to handle hovering and feedback to the person saying they disagree, a path to a single additional field for a DB record (essentially "contestedByAnswerProvider" or similar) then a path back to the browser to render that to viewers, no further calculations or sorting - doesn't seem like a "huge change" to me, but..... again, ah well
huge change = new buttons, sort ordering, display changes (for the indicator).
For a simple site, it's easy enough, sure.
But everything that happens on SO is logged, traceable, can be reverted, etc. So a lot more happens in the background than just the UI
then there's testing of new features, introducing the feature to users, faq changes, responding to the inevitable flood of meta posts that follows every new change, ...
So yeah, huge effort
(p.s. I don't really know what happens behind the scene, really. I'm just blowing smoke while waiting for code to compile.... tra la la ..)
@ShawnChin You can't delete your own answer while it is accepted, so either one must get the asker to unaccept, or find a mod willing to delete it (unless it has a negative score, then finding three high-rep users voting to delete it would work).
The idea is that sometimes someone will post an answer and get the accepted answer award, even when it is obvious that someone else has an answer that is more correct. This can be done either through the OP's laziness in only awarding the check mark to the first decent answer, or because the OP j...
cool - yeah, I think that's something that crossed my mind, but it would take significantly more work and db linkings and I think a lot of people would think the OP should have more control
with my idea, it would be a superficial statement
the OP would be notified the same way they'd be notified of a comment, answer, or upvote, but no recalculation or sorting changes - just an indicator to people casually browsing the site that the answerer changed his mind
On SO and Meta it will not let me start a bounty....
(Chrome dies here, but only sometimes)
This last picture is where I get stuck. I press the "Start Bounty" button but nothing happens. I've tried entering a message for the user, even though it says "optional", but it still does not ...
The old version of the script was causing exceptions after the share link was changed, but the userscripts run too late to impact the setup of any of the site code...so I'm confused where the conflict is. :/
Either way though, I've had a lot of stuff unexpectedly dumped on me this last week and a half, but assuming no one tries to take this weekend away from me I'll look into the update notification this weekend after I finish what I was doing with Data Explorer.
@RebeccaChernoff Right, I know there was an error, I just don't see how that error was impacting anything else.
Well...I'll look into it, but I don't know how much good it'll do.
Not to be difficult, but I'm having a hard time believing that the userscript was to blame in this case. :P
And when it threw the exception, it might have prevented the script from showing any update notification anyway...but I'll see what can be done about that.
@RebeccaChernoff Alright, I'll protect all the scripts against interfering in this way.
That said, the bounty response has (as far as I know) zero reason to wrap its JavaScript in $(function() {}). If it just did (function () {})() it wouldn't have been at the mercy of my TypeError based on a quick test with Fiddler.
So you were right, totally the userscript's fault and I will address this both directly and with looking into the update notification feature. :)
Anyone know where to find the question about why people who edit questions behave differently than people who edit answers? I saw it earlier today but can't track it down now. And I didn't actually visit it, so it's not in my browser history.
That's the closest one I found, too. It's not quite right. I dunno, maybe the question I'm looking for doesn't exist, and I'm misremembering, or misread some other title earlier without realizing it.
There were some changes to the display around that time, so perhaps that's related. Doesn't seem like the dates work out quite right though...but if we add in a little hand waving and go "Oh, magic from the before-times", I'm willing to believe that makes sense.
Oh no, actually it does. It looks like when the change was made, all non-deleted CW posts had that field updated, maybe, so anything deleted prior to the change has the pre-existing display.
On SO and Meta it will not let me start a bounty....
(Chrome dies here, but only sometimes)
This last picture is where I get stuck. I press the "Start Bounty" button but nothing happens. I've tried entering a message for the user, even though it says "optional", but it still does not ...
