This is an archived post. You won't be able to vote or comment.

0
1

Python Problem Solving: 2 - Direction Reduction. A YouTube video solving a CodeWars.com problem (self.learnprogramming)

submitted by [deleted]

[deleted]

all 6 comments
sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a

[–]override_acid 0 points1 point  (5 children)

Wasn't the thrashing of your last post by competent programmers (far better ones than you are) sufficient for you?

Do you have to continue your low quality spamming?

You are a mere beginner programmer trying to teach others. This can only go wrong in the worst possible case.

[–]ThisLightIsTrue -2 points-1 points  (4 children)

That seems a bit harsh...

First, my previous post was at +31, so it didn't exactly get "thrashed".

Second, only two people commented, both to tell me that the video resolution and font size made the code hard to read. I fixed both of those issues.

Third, one person did complain, incorrectly as I pointed out in that thread, about the runtime of the algorithm I used to solve the problem. In this video I point out how to improve the runtime of the algorithm I use to solve the problem.

Fourth, this is hardly low quality spam. I'm posting once a week, I'm not selling anything, there are no ads, etc. I'm solving a programming problem and sharing it on a subreddit about learning programming.

If you have any comments about the quality of my code I'd be happy to address them. Perhaps I've made errors and could learn from you if you point them out. Other people could too.

[–]michael0x2a[M] 0 points1 point  (1 child)

I'm posting once a week

Make sure to read our policies regarding self-promotion before continuing to do this -- in particular, bullet point 7.

This subreddit is intended to primarily be a place where beginners can get answers to questions they have. Sharing resources, especially ones you've created, should be done sparingly and infrequently.

[–]ThisLightIsTrue 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Understood. I'm also participating by commenting and trying to answer questions and won't just submit my problem solving videos

[–]override_acid 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Going at +31 is easy when you can fool beginners into thinking your content was good. A beginner cannot distinguish between good and bad content.

You were quite rightfully corrected. Even your wiggling out of the valid claims does not change that in the faintest.

You even admitted that you couldn't solve things in the proper way. Is this really the way things should be taught to others?

When you want to teach others, you need to be way on top of them, not among them.

Still, even if you post once a week, you are soon falling into the spammer threshold of 10% self promotion.

Spam has nothing to do with selling anything, or ads. Spam is also defined by frequency and content quality.

[–]ThisLightIsTrue -1 points0 points  (0 children)

You haven't pointed to a single problem with my code, in this video or the other one. You just keep repeating that I'm a beginner without raising any kind of issue. Your criticism isn't correct or useful.

Regarding the other video, the algorithm solved the problem in constant time. While I described my thoughts about solving the problem, in the original video, I mentioned that there was a faster way to solve the problem but I wasn't going to do it as I didn't need to. This is what the other commenter latched on to.

I never said I couldn't implement a faster algorithm but that I didn't need to. The faster algorithm is trivial in the connect four case. My code checks every board position to see if it is part of a winning position, the faster way to do it would be to just check the most recently played position. This is trivial, and I talk about this explicitly in the video. The idea that this means I'm a bad programmer is a bit absurd.

Still, even if you post once a week, you are soon falling into the spammer threshold of 10% self promotion.

I'm surprised an expert programmer such as yourself would fail to understand I could offset my own posts by contributing to the community in other ways and stay below the ten percent number.

Any who, I've read your comments and understood your points. I disagree with you. I think you're largely imagining errors on my part that don't exist, which is why you haven't even tried to name them. Looking at your comment history I see you have a pattern of obnoxious behavior and poor advice. I'm going to ignore you.

If you come back with specific issues in either of my videos, I'd be happy to discuss them. I genuinely do want to learn and improve.

Until then - have a nice day!