1

Sometimes, a single question on SO may actually be composed of 2 or more smaller and closely related questions. The current example I'm thinking of is this one: std::move into static_pointer_cast: Why doesn't static_pointer_cast have an rvalue reference overload?. There's two question marks, and each one is asking something different, but they are related, and I don't think there would be much benefit in asking the OP to split it into two questions (as well, an ideal answer may source the same material or explanation to answer both).

Is it ok to post an answer that only explains one of the two parts? In essence this is an answer that I admit up front is not the ideal answer, but since a day has gone by and nobody has answered yet, I still feel like there is value in trying to answer a non-trivial part.

Is there any consensus on this?

Improve this question

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
1

Yes, it's fine to answer just part of the question, especially if it's complex. From How to Answer:

Any answer that gets the asker going in the right direction is helpful, but do try to mention any limitations, assumptions or simplifications in your answer. Brevity is acceptable, but fuller explanations are better.

If you've got a solution to part of the problem, that 'nudge' in the right direction might be all they need. There's no use keeping that knowledge to yourself, so posting an answer will help everyone involved.

Using an answer is the right thing here—comments are for clarification / critique of a post, which your post would not be, and the only other option is to not post the answer at all. If you can help the author get closer to the answer, do so. Back up what you can with references, and be sure to mention what you couldn't find out the answer to, so others coming to the post can answer if they know more.

Finding the answer to hard questions might be a collaborative effort between multiple users—this is a great thing, so don't be afraid to get the ball rolling!

Improve this answer
3
  • This might apply in the specific case of a question with two co-equal parts. However, it is written in the general case, and makes two highly erroneous claims about that. First, information which does not answer the main question must never be posted as an "answer" - because it fundamentally does not answer the question. Second, useful information that does not rise to the level of an answer is not only a proper use of a comment, but an ideal use of one. It's a serious misconception to think that comments are only for clarity issues with the question.
    – Chris Stratton
    Commented Jul 12, 2017 at 8:43
  • 1
    @ChrisStratton The fact that comments are for clarification and suggesting improvements to a post is not a misconception from me—it is stated in the help center, the placeholder text of the 'add comment' box for questions, and it is enforced by moderators when flagged, including by Community Managers in the early stages of beta sites. Robert Cartaino's justification for why comments should not be used for answers puts it far better than I ever could, but this is correct advice.
    – Aurora0001
    Commented Jul 12, 2017 at 14:38
  • No, it's not - and there's no better evidence than the fact that "this is a clue towards an answer" is not a flagging reason for a comment. In fact, there is no flagging reason that would fit such a comment, because such comments are proper and necessary.
    – Chris Stratton
    Commented Jul 12, 2017 at 15:21

You must log in to answer this question.

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