Just want to understand the edit process towards being a better editor, making less work for reviewers. ( I didn't find an Editing FAQ ). Have a specific instance as example: got some very helpful code (on main StackOverflow) as an answer from another user. So helpful, for me at least, that I'm going to award a bounty on it. Figuring it might be helpful to others, I tried the (Java-android) code as supplied, found missing imports, etc., fixed a few typos and common syntax errors. The fixes were fairly trivial, but might trip up a lesser experienced coder. My editorial process was probably typical: rapid fire corrections, say 3 to 4 edits in 5 - 10 mins, saving each time (without changing the original note about the purpose of the edit), followed by a few more later when I found some bugs.

All of my edits were queued up under what appeared to me as the same as-yet-to-be-approved edit. So does that mean it really will be one edit review for the reviewer, or will he or she have to review each of the individual edits ?

Understood, it would have been better for me to catch all this stuff and just do one, encompassing edit. Yet, it's probably common for this not to be possible, e.g. the bug I found didn't show up until I plopped the code into its bigger context.

I guess what I'm really asking (sorry to be verbose :) ... is it really OK to do a bunch of little, but non-trivial edits, or is that really frowned on ? (No, I'd never edit "Its" to "It's" :)) (I did read the great edit wars post --- sorta as fun as War and Peace )

  • Having trouble following this - are you saying you were editing the other answer to make corrections to the code and to fix typos, etc? And since you made several rapid fire edits to the same post, you are curious how the suggested editing & review process worked in this scenerio? – psubsee2003 Sep 4 '13 at 18:48
  • @psubsee2003 yes, sorry if unclear --- I posted the original question, an answer came through that was excellent, then I edited that answer. Here is the exact post: stackoverflow.com/questions/18474634/… – Howard Pautz Sep 4 '13 at 18:50

They were all rolled into a single suggestion. You can see all of the edits you suggested on your profile. They were all rolled into this suggested edit.

As for the edit itself, most of it seems appropriate, but two things seem off. import statements are frequently omitted intentionally, due to the space they consume, unless there is a compelling reason to include them (i.e. it's the crux of the problem surrounding the question). I wouldn't suggest adding them in.

Next, you made a private variable protected, and I see no compelling reason for that change in the code shown. This is making a semantic change to the author's content. I see no reason to assume that they meant to write protected but didn't. For the misspelled type name, variable name, missing/extraneous parenthesis, etc. it's clear that you're fixing typos and that the author intended to write what your edit changed it to, so they are good edits to make.

  • thx - here's the FAQ, editing down about half way ... meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7931/… – Howard Pautz Sep 4 '13 at 18:53
  • @HowardPautz Okay...and why are you linking to that? – Servy Sep 4 '13 at 18:54
  • just added link for reference in case others hit my question here ... wouldn't have guess it shows up in profile under activity->suggestions, did just find activity->revisions based on your comment. Thx too for the very specific, helpful explanations re pro / con on my edits. I agree with them, except the private vs. protect scope - it causes errors in android studio (not sure why). – Howard Pautz Sep 4 '13 at 19:01
  • @HowardPautz I didn't look at it in detail, but if you don't even understand what's going on you shouldn't be making the change; at most make a comment so that someone who does understand what's going on can clarify. Just expanding scope until things compile is a pretty poor programming practice. Scopes should be carefully considered. – Servy Sep 4 '13 at 19:02
  • I couldn't agree more ! I understand the reason for the scope change, but not why android studio flagged it ... two separate issues. And, as a matter of fact, it will work correctly in either scope, but I just determined that, so I'll edit it back to the earlier. – Howard Pautz Sep 4 '13 at 19:05
  • edited out the imports and did the scope undo as you suggested. Getting the gist of this slowly :)) – Howard Pautz Sep 4 '13 at 19:11
  • 1
    @HowardPautz part of the problem with making edits like this, especially as a low rep user, is that fixing them is tough. Your 2nd suggested edit is very close to getting rejected. I only approved it because i saw this post, but had I seen it in the queue. I would have rejected it. – psubsee2003 Sep 4 '13 at 19:28
  • @HowardPautz fortunately, it got approved. – psubsee2003 Sep 4 '13 at 19:29
  • @psubsee2003 thx for helping it go thru. Servy's correct - I should have been more careful, but the process of test, edit, catch just happened that way. RE low rep user - understood how it could get messy :)) Once in a while though, rep count doesn't rep the user. ( I've been watching SE since it started, but just signed up recently; and that particular area the OP covers is one I've spent way too much time on :)) ) Meta's great for working out this stuff ! – Howard Pautz Sep 4 '13 at 19:34

You must log in to answer this question.

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