Go Down

Topic: @admins: please enlarge max size of posts from 9000 to min 32000 chars! (Read 4753 times) previous topic - next topic

goodinventor


Robin2

so 99.9% of the rest without that rediculous limit finally can't be wrong!
Don't be silly - of course they are.

...R
Two or three hours spent thinking and reading documentation solves most programming problems.

nickgammon

so c'mon, be a little more open-minded and user-friendly!
AWOL hasn't posted anything unfriendly, what are you getting at? Are you using the "insult people who disgree with you" technique?

And again:

hell, what narrow-minded and user-hostile attitudes in this forum!
More insults. Can't you post without insulting people?




Read this about a Minimal, Complete, and Verifiable example.

We don't mind reading 5k of code to help find a problem. If you need to post 30k you should be making a MCVE - minimal example. Or, upload a .zip file with your project files in it.

Are you seriously suggesting that thousands of lines of code should take up a forum page, to save you the effort of doing that? It also makes the forum hard to read.


Quote
if one had the chance to post the whole code and then ask the question, it would be perfect, sure.
What if you have multiple files? Big projects tend to do that. Then you are asking people to copy/paste a dozen files into their own editor, try to guess the file names, save them into a folder, and then try to reproduce the issue. At least if the poster uploads a .zip file all that work is done.

Bear in mind this is a free service run by unpaid volunteers.

it's the only forum with that essing restriction, so 99.9% of the rest without that rediculous limit finally can't be wrong!
That statement is wrong. On my own forum I also have a limit of 6000 characters. That has had 76,289 posts on it as at today, and I don't recall anyone complaining about it.
Please post technical questions on the forum, not by personal message. Thanks!

More info: http://www.gammon.com.au/electronics

GoForSmoke

I've been in the process of simplifying an example of something I couldn't get to work when I saw my main error. I found the bug before posting to ask for help.

When you have big code with problems, you ask a lot for someone else to get into that looking for bugs. It happens, help is given, but check views vs useful replies.

A bug can be anything from a single typo to an approach that has painted itself into a corner. If you ask much you should be tolerant and flexible enough to consider suggestions without making personal inferences, for example "that's retarded" is not the same as "you're retarded". See?

ps - deal with compilers a few years and you should grow thicker skin knowing how often you can be wrong.
1) http://gammon.com.au/blink  <-- tasking Arduino 1-2-3
2) http://gammon.com.au/serial <-- techniques howto
3) http://gammon.com.au/interrupts
Your sketch can sense ongoing process events in time.
Your sketch can make events to control it over time.

ArthurD

I just found the problem of my latest bug which I was unable to fix, and the program was about remote-
controlling motors by an anolog joystick, using UART data communication:

The code worked fine for the Joystick part locally, but failed when additionally using an UART setup.

The bug finally was obscured in a function or declaration part which had actually nothing to do with neither the  joystick reading nor with the UART data transmission. It had been caused by a meanwhile unused UTFT configuration at the head of the program (myTFT = UTFT(...) or something, assigning pins whiich interfered with the Joystick pins just by assigning them) which once had been added for debugging reasons but currently had been dismissed, actually already for a quite long time.

Thus even if I had cut down my code for minimal posting purposes ( or just because of it, if I once had done it !) to the pure Joystick and UART procedures the bugged part had been removed too and NEVER might have been detected: 100% for sure all of the UTFT definitions and initializations had been the first ones to be removed.

So other way round: Just because I was able to post the whole unchanged code in another forum and one now could compare line by line between bugged and fine working versions the bug could be finally detected and removed.

Therefore this "simplifying thing" had made everything even worse, and that's why the ability for posting the entire, unchanged code in a code box is indispensible.

Other forums do it this way, providing upper limits to 32000 or even 64000 chars. Nevertheless, in code boxes they appear as small as either tiny code snippet.

Robin2

Thus even if I had cut down my code for minimal posting purposes ( or just because of it, if I once had done it !) to the pure Joystick and UART procedures the bugged part had been removed too and NEVER might have been detected: 100% for sure all of the UTFT definitions and initializations had been the first ones to be removed.
That suggests very ineffective debugging.

If the short code worked properly woudn't it be obvious that the problem lay elsewhere?

For that reason alone, the short code would be very useful.

...R
Two or three hours spent thinking and reading documentation solves most programming problems.

ArthurD

rubbish, but it shows clearly: in your snooty attitude you're actually not interested in accespting reasonable arguments.

Finally I had already posted the short code, the issue was about the long, faulty one.

"The horizon of many people is a circle with zero radius which they call their point of view."
(hmmm... By whom may I have read this... )

AWOL

"Pete, it's a fool (who) looks for logic in the chambers of the human heart." Ulysses Everett McGill.
Do not send technical questions via personal messaging - they will be ignored.
I speak for myself, not Arduino.

Go Up