# Low teaching quality of editorials

Why does codechef have such a bad explanation technique? They have excellent resources when it comes to introduction to programming for school students but when it comes to editorial they severely lack quality. This is where they fall behind GeekForGeeks. I have solved a few questions during the long challenge but reading editorial for the same question takes too much effort and even though the method used is same as mine, I can not understand it at the first go. I request codechef to increase the simplicity in the editorial and come up with teaching techniques similiar to GeekForGeeks, Khan Academy or TedEd.

24 Likes

Correct I agree too… The editorial are so lengthy and not interesting at all… Sometime there is no need for such very big editorial but idk why they wrote .
Codeforces editorial are good as compared to codechef but gfg is best.

5 Likes

+1e18…
If I had lots of time at my disposal…I would make the best kind of editorials…such that even a person who is kind of beginner can understand most of the stuff

I plan to do this in future. People have often said me that I explain in a very easy and simple manner .

17 Likes

Tip for you : Stop visiting this site for competitive programming purposes.

Let me disagree with you.

What do you want spoon feeding? Codechef has most detailed editorials compared to any competitive programming site.
If you are expecting you should be taught 2+3=5 in the editorial then sorry its not possible for editorialist.

22 Likes

Yes, sometimes when the editorial is too long it gets boring.

In future long contests, I’ll ask editorialist to write a quick explanation section - a concise description that gives a general overview of the key points to solve the problem.

I also like when editorials gives successive hints, each of them getting closer to the solution.

16 Likes

do u even understand what u are talking abt
codechef editorials are the only place where
the thought process to reach the answer is explained
only here the proofs are explained
just seee codeforces ediitorials
they are just 4 lines and mostly good coders can can grasp it
u can see the chef vijju’s corner
for editorials written by him which adds similar problems
or problem with different constraaints
which is superb and encourages collective learning

editorialists like vijju ,taran etc
put so much effort to write and how can u say its of low quality

if u don’t have the patience to read 2 pages what abt those who wrote 2 pages

as far as i think if i understand the question and have the prerequities then vijju bhai will make me understand the solution with his editorial always

u never know the value of mother until u go to hostel
u can never appreciate codechef editorials until u go to a place
with 3 lines editorial which has a formula and u don’t even understand how it was derived

9 Likes

Effort does not determine quality. The degree to which the reader understands it, determines the quality.
No one is asking for 4 lines of editorials, they’re asking for simplicity. Length has nothing to do with it. A simple explanation could be shorter or longer depending on the problem.

6 Likes

Disagree with the statement as well as the attitude of this thread.

If you have a problem with any part of the editorial, you should ask more questions. First to yourself, then directed to the community/editorialist.

Further, expressions like “such a bad explanation technique”, “severely lack quality” are subjective.

I have solved a few questions during the long challenge but reading editorial for the same question takes too much effort and even though the method used is same as mine, I can not understand it at the first go.

I think this thread is prompted by “Fibeasy Editorial” by Anand Jaisingh. Even I had some initial difficulty with the editorial. But that was because I was able to figure out that answer is 2^x < N but wasn’t able to think/prove in terms of “MSB”. Instead of criticizing the editorial, perhaps you should try to get into the head of the editorialist and try to figure out how the editorialist is thinking.

All said, sometimes one does find it hard to understand certain editorials - but I think questions are the way to go…

3 Likes

i agree with @aryanc403 as if the editorial just contain like 2+3 = 5 everyone remains as noob like 3-4 star rather than explanation “WHY” . High rated coders want the proof of the algorithm and editorialist were doing hardwork to do that , you cant just simply say low quality like you can do their job .try to write editorials for your solved problems with proof then you will get to know how hard it is . even we (you and me ) are not of that level undestanding the editorial to the fullest it means we need more knowledge on math and we should improve instead shitposting. i like to improve myself on the subject rather shitposting like this which i cant understand . you dont even have experience in writing editorials to say that they were of low quality . and gfg is like our education system just like memorisation nothing more than that . just take a look at CLRS seems you would say that is also low quality .
ps: but i think for every beginner these kinda editorials are hard and cant even get a thing quick explanation is also needed to be put in editorial .

3 Likes

Every editorial had a quick explanation in past. Even codechef editorial template has a section named “QUICK EXPLANATION”. Any specific reason why this section was removed in present editorials?
https://www.codechef.com/wiki/editorial-template

3 Likes

No , but Aryan tell me one thing most of people face this thing , I agree with u of point spoon feeding but there is no meaning of editorial ( very long without taking an example in explaination) if majority of people will not understand , and for gfg I would say that most of the easy to medium question of most of website (codechef codeforces etc.) Are present on gfg with good explanation.
I tried many times and didn’t get the solution in that manner, but ya sometimes other people comment below editorial and explain with example , and it really help me.

1 Like

Ashok tell me is there is any meaning of PhD or something more if u didn’t understand what the teacher want to says…if we understand what teacher wanna say then there is no matter how qualified it is …( In this case how many star he/she have) ,…no I didn’t say they are very bad or anything else but they should explain there approach / solution with an example , it will be more helpful.

1 Like

That is what you should write below editorial as feedback how editorialist can make this editorial better he will keep in mind your reviews before writing the next editorial.
Simply writing “bad explanation” never helps editorial.

Since editorial is lengthy I can assume it explains all things. And if you saying you can grasp it. I did assumed you want you to be explained 2+3=5.

I very cleverly wrote -

I will never ever recommend someone to start learning the basics of cp using gfg.

Debatable. I never used gfg much so wont comment on it.
But at many instances, I found gfg solns wrong and code poorly written.

5 Likes

Try creating a contest you will get to know how much efforts it requires to set problems and test them. And writing editorials on top of that is simply too much effort. Many times external contest are set by atmax 2-3 people where cc has a dedicated team to do this.

11 Likes

I beg to differ. Free doesn’t mean you can just provide anything. The consumer has the right to complain even if it was provided for free.

Edit - Person who is writing editorial is getting paid for it. It doesnt matter wheather reader is paying or not. His job is to write better editorial.

4 Likes

Interesting debate. Let me see what I can add.

but reading editorial for the same question takes too much effort

I do not follow. You want to solve all hard problems. You also do not want it to have any effort in reading and grasping editorial. What are YOU doing to improve YOURSELF then? Giving the editorial the divine grace of reading it?

Nobody said editorials will make all problems a cakewalk. I can understand if one says that “some weird jagrons, naming, conventions are used in editorial” but if you cannot even understand something formal explained mathematically - then please know that you NEED to improve that part.

Stating things mathematically is the most widely accepted method of stating things precisely. If you are trying to escape that, you will never be able to cross a particular rating threshold even years of CP.

The editorial are so lengthy and not interesting at all… Sometime there is no need for such very big editorial but idk why they wrote .

Because there are people who did NOT understand the solution that quickly. The editorial is read by audience of varying ratings, and the aim is that they grasp the solution. Have you ever read @kevinsogo 's editorials? They are a damnnn masterpiece!

Just because you got the solution quick does not mean that you get to complain that editorial should be shorter. If the editorial is explaining something, I will never prefer having it cut down just so that someone does not feel its too long.

Of course, you dont put in all details like 1+1=2 either. That type of length should ideally be kept in hidden boxes so its optional. But I will not allow deleting/shortening even that length.

@anon55659401
such that even a person who is kind of beginner can understand most of the stuff

And if you do this for Medium+ problems, you will get a lengthy editorial which is being complained about. So you kind of contradicted yourself by agreeing with OP that editorials must not be long, and yourself following the approach which makes editorials lengthy.

Tip for you : Stop visiting this site for competitive programming purposes.

+1 . Their Geometric algorithm collection is horrible - their implementation/idea misses almost every corner case possible. For instance - I was once referring to their code of point inside polygon for writing an editorial and wasted 3 days over their wrong implementation.

@alei
Yes, sometimes when the editorial is too long it gets boring.

I disagree. Editorial can get boring only under 2 cases-

• Either you already solved the problem and editorial’s method matches with your own. In this case editorial is not imparting lot of new ideas and stuff to you - but I argue that editorials are made keeping those people in mind who failed to solve the problem, rather than those who solved the problem. The main motivation of people who solved the problem to read the editorial is to look at alternate approaches, which can be kept later in some bonus section. High rated coders, whose solution matches with that of editorial are not as important part of audience as those who failed to solve the problem - so I’d prefer a lengthy editorial with proper divisions in this case.
• If you did not solve the problem and are getting bored then its due to the explanation not making sense to you - rather than length. No one feels that “Omg there are 2k words more to read. I am getting bored” , rather, they read a bunch of paragraphs, arent able to make head or tail out of it and get frustrated and “bored”. In this case the chief culprit is quality and simplicity of explanation, rather than length of editorial.

I also like when editorials gives successive hints, each of them getting closer to the solution.

Yes, that is very ideal. But even that can be “Boring” to peeps who figured out the entire solution. So I think you get my point when I say that high rated coders are not the most important part of audience to consider when writing editorial.

For high rated coders, usually quick explanation suffices, and that section actually solves all this problem of editorial being unable to serve to audience of varying ratings effectively.

In future long contests, I’ll ask editorialist to write a quick explanation section - a concise description that gives a general overview of the key points to solve the problem.

if u don’t have the patience to read 2 pages what abt those who wrote 2 pages

+1

Effort does not determine quality. The degree to which the reader understands it, determines the quality.

This is actually doubly interpretable. I think you meant it in sense that “How easy the editorial is for people to grasp determines the quality” to which I agree.

If the interpretation is that “Readers being able to understand the editorial” then that is a flawed metric, as now your “quality” depends on the audience and a good editorial at, say in month of August, may not be a good editorial in “October” because the audience now changed and they no longer find it good enough. In this case, the flaw is in audience not the editorial.

there is no meaning of editorial ( very long without taking an example in explaination) if majority of people will not understand

That is a valid point that explanations are made easier with examples. But examples also contribute to length and AFAIK you are against long editorials

You just cant take examples everywhere - its not that simple. Also, I feel if you want an example, you should comment at editorial. I try to provide examples after explanation in bonus section, or when requested in comments. In middle of explanation is not possible everytime.

Not to mention, some editorialists fall for “Proof by example” where instead of giving some sort of formal/inform proof or intuition, they just give 1-3 examples and say the observation is proved.

for gfg I would say that most of the easy to medium question of most of website (codechef codeforces etc.) Are present on gfg with good explanation.

Try cp algorithms. If you feel GFG is the upper limit, that site is going to change that.

17 Likes

All the points which u said are absolutely correct and I agree too ( now) but sometimes ( most of the times ) when the editorial are like fully mathematical just range i to j and all mathematical it’s frustrating but if we take an example side by side to explain our algorithm it would be more more better for coders like me…

2 Likes

i am studying from CP-algorithms but their question bank is a bit outdated i must say!
I am doing tag searching on codeforces and searching problems of the topic on Hackerrank and Hackerearth!

My input to the debate is as a person who is new to Competitive programming it takes me a lot of time to understand most editorials but the satisfaction i receive from arriving to the solution on reading the editorial and then implementing is immense i must say!
Even if the editorial gets long or ‘boring’ I don’t find any issue because we are able to think with the mind of the problem setter!

2 Likes

Well, too many mathematical symbols do sometimes make a relatively easy problem seem harder. But… Let’s take an example:
Problem: Given a matrix of size n*m, find the sum of all elements in a matrix.

Mathematical editorial

The answer is simply \sum_{i=0}^{n-1} \sum_{j=0}^{m-1} a_{i,j} .

Complexity : O(n*m)

Non-mathematical editorial

To find the solution of the problem, we loop for every row and for each cell in the row, we add its value to our final answer. Since there are n rows in the matrix, and m elements in each row, the complexity of the solution is O(n*m). Here is the code snippet for the solution.

    for(int i = 0; i < n; i++){
for(int j = 0; j < m; j++){
ans += a[i][j];
}
}


Well, the differences are pretty obvious. Also, a major part of the argument is unnecessarily long editorials. Hence, if a few mathematical symbols makes an editorial compact and clean, I guess using mathematical symbols improves the editorial quality by a huge margin.

4 Likes

Yes, that point is fair. Fully mathematical editorials are hard to understand, but I bet there are even short editorials like that which are fully mathematical and perhaps difficult to understand. Since you agree that this part does not depend on length I think the point is made

3 Likes