This question was recently closed as being not constructive:
The author shows us the approach he is using, says it's "less than optimal," and asks if there is "a better way."
The wording is a bit vague, but it's still pretty easy to see that the OP wants suggestions on alternative ways to accomplish this same task. Maybe he wants to optimize for size or optimize for performance, maybe he just wants to compare his options and choose the best one.
The question was closed as being "not constructive," giving it a boilerplate note reading:
This question is not a good fit to our Q&A format. We expect answers to generally involve facts, references, or specific expertise; this question will likely solicit opinion, debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. See the FAQ.
This is confusing to me because:
This simple question about munging strings clearly invites factual answers rather than opinion. It only received factual, objective answers; none were opinionated.
Specific reference to an article by an expert was given in one answer.
No opinionated statements were made; no debates, arguments, or polling took place.
Extended discussion did not arise. None of the comment sections need to be expanded to read them in their entirety.
In fact this question seems to satisfy all of the requirements for not being "not constructive," Clearly there is something I am missing. Can anyone explain why this question might be considered "not constructive?" The only justification I can think of is that it could be seen as too specific to be generally useful, or that optimizations questions are not welcome, although I don't agree with those points of view.