-4

Here's the question I'm referring to at this point.

Converted my code from C# to VB.NET and now it's throwing an error

It's often frustrating seeing new users getting their questions closed too quickly because either:

  1. It's in an undesirable language
  2. It's not written with the most perfect grammar
  3. People are just being pissy or some other invalid reason beyond my knowledge.

Can someone please explain to me why this is closes as "Not A Real Question"?

(Note: I did edit it a little to help clarify the question).

Improve this question
12
  • I think that that question should be closed anyway, but for the other reason: it is too specific in current form and will not help future visitors.
    – om-nom-nom
    Commented Mar 4, 2012 at 18:44
  • 1
    not necessarily. If someone else comes up against a 'var is undefined` error, they could very well get the answer required.
    – Chase Florell
    Commented Mar 4, 2012 at 18:46
  • The keypoint is current form. I do agree with you that this could be helpful in general form, e.g. if the question theme would be var is undefined in vb.
    – om-nom-nom
    Commented Mar 4, 2012 at 18:50
  • 3
    I'm pretty sure OP reverting a good edit didn't help much... The original version of the question was awful, although it should be noted that five users edited it and gradually brought it to shape (somewhat). However I don't really think we should berate close voters for not wasting any time on this. Closed questions can be re-opened if improved, closing it's just a peer review mechanism.
    – yannis
    Commented Mar 4, 2012 at 18:51
  • And you included info of the c# code and how it was converted (did you use a tool, website to convert it etc)
    – redsquare
    Commented Mar 4, 2012 at 18:51
  • The OP did not include the original C# code.
    – Chase Florell
    Commented Mar 4, 2012 at 19:09
  • And yes @YannisRizos I agree with you.
    – Chase Florell
    Commented Mar 4, 2012 at 19:14
  • Just for the record, @Yannis, I'm quite sure the reversal of that edit was accidental. (The edit from Moo-Juice was saved at 17.43:43, and the OP's edit 17.43:57, making me believe the OP was oblivious about the other edit, and probably even started editing before Moo-Juice saved.)
    – Arjan
    Commented Mar 4, 2012 at 19:28
  • @Arjan Good catch, I didn't notice that.
    – yannis
    Commented Mar 4, 2012 at 19:33
  • I can only guess it is the invisible force of the dreaded flag queue at work again.
    – Uphill Luge
    Commented Mar 4, 2012 at 21:17
  • @UphillLuge I have noticed this since reaching 10k rep. Now that there's a quick way to vote-to-close without actually reviewing the question. Many questions are killed in their infancy very unjustly.
    – Chase Florell
    Commented Mar 4, 2012 at 21:45
  • Hmm, not so sure. There were 5 high-rep users involved in closing it, 10 in re-opening it. Afaict those users did the right thing. How many were involved in the flag queue to push the moderator's buttons is invisible. I'll guess there were not a lot of flags for keeping the question open.
    – Uphill Luge
    Commented Mar 4, 2012 at 22:02

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
7

Looking at the question, it was incorrectly closed as "Not A Real Question". It's a real question, and I see it's been reopened.

However, the question is "Too Localized" (and I've closed it as such, and remember, as always, that the community can vote to reopen if they wish), IMO, in that it's dealing with a syntax error in the code, something that is of little help to people in the future because of how narrow the scope is; it's an error in a very narrowly defined scope that has limited applications (i.e. that particular piece of code code).

There is some information there that could be of use, but I'd suggest a revamp of the question to point out the var aspect of the conversion in the code (there's a bit too much code there to really isolate the point) in order to get it reopened.

Improve this answer
4
  • the question is STILL receiving reopen votes. Please understand that for VB, the question has enough detail to answer AND is an error that a larger group of people "could" run into.
    – Chase Florell
    Commented Mar 4, 2012 at 19:23
  • @ChaseFlorell Well, if it's receiving open votes, then the system works, no? Meta has a tendency to shine a light and put a lot of activity on a question that normally would not.
    – casperOne
    Commented Mar 4, 2012 at 19:25
  • 2
    @ChaseFlorell Also, I've indicated that there is some value, that the questions just need some work; that's what closures are about, they say, "hey, you're off by a little bit, could you please try and fix it". The reason we have different types of closures is to give people indicators about what to fix.
    – casperOne
    Commented Mar 4, 2012 at 19:26
  • I've edited the question (a couple of times) to help bring light to the issue. I stripped the unnecessary code and clarified the question title.
    – Chase Florell
    Commented Mar 4, 2012 at 19:28

You must log in to answer this question.

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