Click here to Skip to main content
15,868,016 members
Please Sign up or sign in to vote.
1.00/5 (3 votes)
See more:
I posted an article 4 times and every time i am expanding it and making it more clear but the committee is rejecting it again and again, some people in comments said make it more clear so expand but i cannot expand it more than this so he said me to write a tip/trick for that, so it did it but again the committee reject.
Its kicking me so hard :@
http://www.codeproject.com/script/Articles/ArticleVersion.aspx?aid=866344&av=1290776&msg=4981713#xx4981713xx[^]
Posted
Updated 16-Jan-15 7:58am
v2
Comments
[no name] 16-Jan-15 14:15pm    
Please don't be frustrated, take the chance and learn. Search for other articles on CP about your subject and compare.

a.) Some more Information about Motivation and Background is appreciated.
b.) You will find some articles which do not simply list the available Interface, you will find articles who describes each method more detailed.

What I know, there are mentor here to Support you, try to get their help.
Don't stop now, go on and improve!
Bruno
Sergey Alexandrovich Kryukov 16-Jan-15 15:18pm    
Bruno,

First of all, you are right.

However, I really don't see the reasons for rejection of the article as a part of moderation (unless it is plagiarized, I just don't know at the moment and hope it isn't).

All the problems I can see are in the content of the article, which should be decided by voting. Yes, the article presently has little value, but many other article here are even worse. It could be just voting.

Please see my Solution 2. I explained what's wrong and suggest how to improve this work. The topic is pretty interesting, so please see my suggestions.

—SA
Sheriyar Siddiqui 16-Jan-15 15:49pm    
No man its not plagiarized, i wrote it by my own!
[no name] 16-Jan-15 16:09pm    
"No man" is not appropriate.
Sergey Alexandrovich Kryukov 16-Jan-15 16:15pm    
Sure. This is what I assumed when I was writing my answer, did you noticed that.
I just list some possible reasons for moderation. Plagiarism, spamming and some shameless behavior (in pretty rare cases) are sure reasons to cancel the offender's CodeProject account, other ones lead to removal of the posts. And mistakes happen... The site and the whole work could benefit from some improvements...
—SA

This is the wrong place to bring this, there is a forum for article writing where you can get support and help: http://www.codeproject.com/Forums/1641/Article-Writing.aspx[^]

But, since you have...
This is the first time I've seen your article, and I have to agree with whoever has been speaking to you (their comments aren't visible because the article is closed) - that isn't an article. It could be a tip, but as a full blown article it is rather thin, and lacking in any details.
You have a small amount of code (double spaced to make it look bigger) that really doesn;t tell you much about it.
You have an even smaller amount of words which basically introduce the download without explaining how it works, why it exists, or why I might want to use it.

Try something for me: have a look at the article, and use the "Collapse" feature on each code block to "hide" it. Look at what you have left. Not a lot, is it?

The problem is that an article is supposed to be all about the words - a research document if you like - with images and code fragments added to make the text more readable and easier to understand. Yours isn't, not yet - it's all download with a small explanation of how to use it. I am sure you have put some work into the code and getting it right, but you need to explain how it works, why it is how it is, and how it is better than the alternatives. At the moment, this doesn't do that - it just presents the code.

In truth, all articles are moderated - and by people who write articles, that's the only way to get the privilege. And that means that we know how difficult it is to write the words - a heck of a lot harder than writing the code behind them! But...part of the "job" of moderating is to maintain the high standard of articles - which is after all why people come here, and why people write articles for here. If we let through poor quality, you would hate it even more when it gets comments and downvotes indicating it isn't very good - which it almost certainly would.

I would not let this through in it's current form either, there just isn't an article there. I'd agree there could be a tip there, but even then it needs investment in words, and the removal of most of the code, which is pretty much irrelevant. Don't take this as a kick in the teeth by the committee, it isn't that way at all. Moderators who reject things often give comments which can help you get this up to a publishable standard - try looking at what they said and reading the article as if you were a random member rather than the author. Would you want to invest your precious time in trying to use this, or would you move on to something that shows more of what I can do with it, and that it's a quality project that will help me past a problem? I have to say that on the basis of that article, I'd move right along and look at the next candidate (if I even found yours by searching for terms relevant to me).

Harsh? Maybe. But try thinking like a punter for a change and you might see the article differently.
 
Share this answer
 
I have no idea why your article was rejected during moderation, but I would likely down-vote it based just on some problems in its content. I just don't want to download and look at your code, so my notes will be just on the content I can see on the main article page.

First of all, your idea is pretty interesting but quite well-known. Your first problem is wrong terminology and the title. What you model is not "fraction numbers". It has a well-establish name and mathematical concept: rational numbers:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rational_number[^].

Note that not all fractional numbers are rational. Actually, it's a really easy to proof that the set of rational numbers has the same cardinal number (infinite, please see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cardinal_number[^]) as the set or integer numbers. It is a very usual exercise in the middle-level calculus course. Of course, you should clearly understand that all numbers represented in all computer formats always make a finite set (just because all the states of the computer itself make only the finite set; please see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finite-state_machine[^]).

So, the rational number object should be represented as a pair of integers. This should be its internal representation, nothing else. You constructor accepting and parsing the string into a rational number object is maybe nice, but is pretty much irrelevant. Put it this way: using it would be a kind of abuse and not really needed. All functionality should be in its arithmetic, and here your article lacks important things. (I am talking of your article, not code. If this is in your code, you should explain it in the article, otherwise — why writing it?)

First of all, you did not describe most important thing: reduction of the fraction, finding common denominator and dividing by it. Maybe you do it in your constructor, maybe you do it in your operators. You should do it. But you also need to describe it, because this is the part of code functionality. You need to show how this is designed and implemented, and explain all mathematical aspects of it.
You need to consider all the features mentioned here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fraction_%28mathematics%29[^].

Now, you are using C++. How do you implement operators? I don't see the description of your operator overloading. This is a programming forum. For proper programming culture, you need to utilize "operator overloading" and explain its use to less experienced developers. Please see:
http://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/language/operators[^].

So, again, let's assume that you include full implementation in your downloadable code. I'm just not interested to download it and look at it, because your article is already unsatisfactory. Here is what you do: you describe only the usage of your class library, with limited features, without demonstrating the results, special cases, etc. Do you understand how it looks? It looks like advertizement. Advertizement style just irritates the readers. People want to see that you are doing decent thing and provide really open source with well-defined, neat and maintainable implementation right away, before downloading code. Otherwise, why bothering?

Finally, remember that hatred is something opposite to any creative work. I can understand your frustration, but here you communicate with people. Yes, life often suggests one or another reason for hatred. But it's always better to be slow in hatred, quick on collaboration. First, try to talk to people, and only later decide if you like something or not. In case of my post, for example, I just try to suggest you the ways for improvement. I advise you to use them.

—SA
 
Share this answer
 
v5
Comments
Sheriyar Siddiqui 16-Jan-15 15:16pm    
Thank You So Much Both of You. I was about to leave the site forever but now i will try again in a nice manner and this time i will not fail
Sergey Alexandrovich Kryukov 16-Jan-15 15:29pm    
I'm quite glad you are changing your decisions. It's not that important that you tend to do some mistakes (do you know anyone who don't?), but the ability to change and fix is way more important.

Now, let me tell you my subjective impression: on this site, there are quite a few rude, harsh people with questionable moral views, a number of shameless plagiators or spammers join it again and again. But — isn't that a law of nature? — most of really knowledgeable and experience people are very collaborative, correct and even nice, especially if others treat them correctly. Even if some can loose patience and temper, it won't happen if there are treated just fairly. This is a good place, I'm sure.

You are very welcome.
Good luck, call again.

—SA
Sheriyar Siddiqui 16-Jan-15 15:51pm    
Thanks Again :)!
Sergey Alexandrovich Kryukov 16-Jan-15 16:16pm    
Sure...

This content, along with any associated source code and files, is licensed under The Code Project Open License (CPOL)



CodeProject, 20 Bay Street, 11th Floor Toronto, Ontario, Canada M5J 2N8 +1 (416) 849-8900