I chanced upon a question that:
- has compilable code;
- has an obvious goal (not stated outside the code, but clear from the messages the code prints);
- formulates a question about a specific part of the code, and while that question uses incorrect terminology, it is perfectly understandable.
We have someone who's written a short program and has a difficulty. It's clearly someone on a learning path, not someone out of his depth. The question isn't asking for code: it's asking for an explanation of a part of the code, and ideally a way to fix that part of the code.
So why was this question closed as “Questions asking for code must demonstrate a minimal understanding of the problem being solved”?