July 20, 2011 at 7:37 am
I think all the people who cheated by running the code first and still managed to get the question wrong, and then complain about it, may be taking things just a little too seriously.;-)
July 20, 2011 at 7:41 am
Richard Warr (7/20/2011)
I think all the people who cheated by running the code first and still managed to get the question wrong, and then complain about it, may be taking things just a little too seriously.;-)
You are so right Richard. Funny thing is that just "was how the QOTD works" for years. Only recently have I come to expect a certain level of anything from the QOTD content.
Sometimes I find an oddly humorous debate in the discussion forum.
July 20, 2011 at 7:42 am
jwbart06 (7/20/2011)
I believe Ninja's_RGR'us has to defend his question, if nothing was said then I would question it.Points are points, I keep going through old questions and see mistakes, I don't believe this was a mistake.
8 pages later.
:hehe::w00t::-D
Congrats on the 1K mark Richard and thanks for the community support!
July 20, 2011 at 7:44 am
SanDroid (7/20/2011)
Richard Warr (7/20/2011)
I think all the people who cheated by running the code first and still managed to get the question wrong, and then complain about it, may be taking things just a little too seriously.;-)You are so right Richard. Funny thing is that just "was how the QOTD works" for years. Only recently have I come to expect a certain level of anything from the QOTD content.
Sometimes I find an oddly humorous debate in the discussion forum.
The main reason for the recent "change" is that Steve is taking the MCM and all the questions come from that preparation study.
July 20, 2011 at 7:45 am
jwbart06 (7/20/2011)
I believe Ninja's_RGR'us has to defend his question, if nothing was said then I would question it.Points are points, I keep going through old questions and see mistakes, I don't believe this was a mistake.
8 pages later.
I still believe there was no error in that qotd, 1M pages later ;-). It was exactly as I intended it to be, tricky, thought provocative and funny at my expanse.
Thanks for taking part in my weird world today :alien:.
July 20, 2011 at 7:47 am
SanDroid (7/20/2011)
All I will say is this:When your question has almost 8 pages of posts before 8:00 AM CDT, you should seriously re-think what you where doing.
It seems from the posts that you might have?
Gave this 2+ weeks of thoughts and decided to go with it. I got pretty much the results I expected and hopefully some people will learn from this. If not ehy can always get a laugh at my expanse!
BTW I was expected 1000 replies to this questions so we're falling behind fast :w00t:.
July 20, 2011 at 7:49 am
mbova407 (7/20/2011)
I notice the mistake, but since that has been common in the QoTD I took it just as that a mistake... tough question, set's a dangerous precedence of having to realize if the mistake is intentional or not.I don't know what I learned from the QoTD today. Be anal Retentive, maybe?
What mistake (please re-read my full expaination in first post)?
Your presumption was the only mistake in that question. Where else are you doing this?
That could be the single biggest thing you ever get from the qotd!
July 20, 2011 at 7:58 am
Ninja's_RGR'us (7/20/2011)
No excuses necessary. I was worried about that in the question as well. If your understanding of the word returned was wrong, then only a guess or running the code could give you the correct answer. Unfortunately this was out of my control.
Agreed, It was well put together with some of your posts saying your intent was to make people think. Well done! It did just that!
July 20, 2011 at 8:03 am
What I don't understand is what does the title of the question have to do with any part of it? Here is what I mean: commenting out the where clause does not change anything simply because the select * from @tbl part (the last union all) already does not have anything to return so the case statement is there for no reason at all. In other words, if the question would be just like its original version but without the where clause (along with the very strange looking case statement) then the results would be the same: insert statement inserting 5 records into table variable and absense of any select statement (which somehow led the author to believe that 0 records are returned when in reality nothing is returned). So if nothing would have changed should the case statement be removed then why is the question titled "That case filter"? I understand that the author tried and looks like succeeded tricking many people into answering the question incorrectly due to not paying enough attention to the wording of the question, but I thought that QotD is supposed to teach/show the site users something new. I really cannot see that there is anything to be learned from this question though. Removing the predicate does not change the answer and yet the question is titled "That case filter" for no good reason.
Just my 2 cents.
Oleg
July 20, 2011 at 8:03 am
Ninja's_RGR'us (7/20/2011)
SanDroid (7/20/2011)
Richard Warr (7/20/2011)
I think all the people who cheated by running the code first and still managed to get the question wrong, and then complain about it, may be taking things just a little too seriously.;-)You are so right Richard. Funny thing is that just "was how the QOTD works" for years. Only recently have I come to expect a certain level of anything from the QOTD content.
Sometimes I find an oddly humorous debate in the discussion forum.
The main reason for the recent "change" is that Steve is taking the MCM and all the questions come from that preparation study.
Are you actually trying to say that your QOTD post is a return to the NORM?!:sick: That we can start expecting these all the time again?!?!? :sick: :sick:
Steve is not the only one that has posted a QOTD in the last 8 weeks.
You are the only QOTD author that I have ever seen get this kind of a response. You should be oddly proud. Maybe not so fast to try to say that this is as expected though.
July 20, 2011 at 8:03 am
bopeavy (7/20/2011)
Ninja's_RGR'us (7/20/2011)
No excuses necessary. I was worried about that in the question as well. If your understanding of the word returned was wrong, then only a guess or running the code could give you the correct answer. Unfortunately this was out of my control.Agreed, It was well put together with some of your posts saying your intent was to make people think. Well done! It did just that!
Yup sometimes the best questions are the ones you ask [to] yourself :kiss:.
I just hope people get around to doing this after "getting their points back". :Whistling:
July 20, 2011 at 8:07 am
Oleg Netchaev (7/20/2011)
What I don't understand is what does the title of the question have to do with any part of it? Here is what I mean: commenting out the where clause does not change anything simply because the select * from @tbl part (the last union all) already does not have anything to return so the case statement is there for no reason at all. In other words, if the question would be just like its original version but without the where clause (along with the very strange looking case statement) then the results would be the same: insert statement inserting 5 records into table variable and absense of any select statement (which somehow led the author to believe that 0 records are returned when in reality nothing is returned). So if nothing would have changed should the case statement be removed then why is the question titled "That case filter"? I understand that the author tried and looks like succeeded tricking many people into answering the question incorrectly due to not paying enough attention to the wording of the question, but I thought that QotD is supposed to teach/show the site users something new. I really cannot see that there is anything to be learned from this question though. The case statement is suspicious (the whole predicate should be reduced to WHERE o.openorder = @openorder as it sould make it look simpler while preserving the logic, removing the predicate does not change the answer and yet the question is titled "That case filter" for no good reason.Just my 2 cents.
Oleg
I had considered that as well. The case statement is a technic that I use once in a while so that has value all by itself.
The title is vonluntarely misleading. Any other title would have given the answer away and taken a lot of value out of the experience. Please reffer to my first post for my full train of thoughts.
July 20, 2011 at 8:11 am
SanDroid (7/20/2011)
Ninja's_RGR'us (7/20/2011)
SanDroid (7/20/2011)
Richard Warr (7/20/2011)
I think all the people who cheated by running the code first and still managed to get the question wrong, and then complain about it, may be taking things just a little too seriously.;-)You are so right Richard. Funny thing is that just "was how the QOTD works" for years. Only recently have I come to expect a certain level of anything from the QOTD content.
Sometimes I find an oddly humorous debate in the discussion forum.
The main reason for the recent "change" is that Steve is taking the MCM and all the questions come from that preparation study.
Are you actually trying to say that your QOTD post is a return to the NORM?!:sick: That we can start expecting these all the time again?!?!? :sick: :sick:
Steve is not the only one that has posted a QOTD in the last 8 weeks.
You are the only QOTD author that I have ever seen get this kind of a response. You should be oddly proud. Maybe not so fast to try to say that this is as expected though.
No I was fully expecting this kind of mixed feelings and I want my points back type of posts.
I can promise you that I have no further questions in the queue, like this or otherwise. So you can cancel your doctor's appointment.
I was merely pointing out that Steve had been the author of a flurry of questions lately which is why there was a nice change of pace (combined with MCM training).
July 20, 2011 at 8:13 am
I can understand people complaining if there was a typo that meant the answer was wrong but to complain that you "assumed" the extra UNION ALL was a mistake, righted it and gave the wrong answer is ridiculous.
Play the question in front of you - and then if it turns out there was an error they will put it right and give the points back.
On the flip side of the coin though - I think maybe "Nothing" rather than "0" would have made more sense on the answer list but I can also see that this would have made it completely obvious and take away less analysis/thought.
July 20, 2011 at 8:14 am
Ninja's_RGR'us (7/20/2011)
BTW I can lend you some points of mine if that can dissipate some of that anxiety :w00t: :Whistling:
Thanks but it's not about the points. I'm a perfectionist with OCD so I take these QOTD's very serious. I think of them as a test of my knowledge not as a way to learn but if I miss a question then I'll read about it and learn why.
Viewing 15 posts - 76 through 90 (of 200 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply