Quality of Editorials being delivered

Recently I spammed an editorial
I won’t take name of any editorialist or mention editorial here, respecting one’s image in the community
Just after that in a few hours I was pinged by @vijju123 regarding the matter, why I flagged it
This is what I put forward to him
Actually I wanted to bring the attention of the community to something important.

I have a few points regarding that editorial and others too.

  1. I have read many editorials on codechef and I find, that many a times the author expects that person reading the editorial is aware of many solving approaches and leave them undiscussed. This becomes a big big blockage in the understanding of that concept. Flipping over links and searching google actually puts down readers moral, on the account where not much material is available online.
    For example, They say we can do it from segment trees, I am like how? There are a lot of ways to put things in segment trees, people make custom nodes in segment tree, how can i figure out the node structure of the segment tree.
  2. Sometimes, editorialist doesn’t use proper English for writing the stuff. Sentences go on missing. He/ She micght be thinking and typing in that course they missed a few important explainatory lines. Hope you understand that while reading something of high attention even small typos make the reader frustrated, after which he/she tends to lose the interest. Maybe he/she has been putting in lots of efforts to understand the approach, sitting with pen and papers, but due to some improper sentences, the person is choking himself/herself between the lines of explanation. Because they are not able to understand what editorialist tends to say
    I know these typos are not intensional, but reading once after writing could improve a lot, and reading from a perspective of a person who doens’t know a approach. Even if possible, if someone from authority could check each blog this seriously, this discussion page can do wonders.
  3. Improper variables are also one of the issue
    for example, someone declared a variable “countP, countQ” above in discussion, then in further down in editorial he uses, “cnt++” as a statement. Just think how difficult it becomes for the person in front to understand such typo and a new algorithm or DS at the same time.
    Sometimes even worse, direct declaration is p++, no mention of what ‘p’ is!
    Understanding code is difficult especially when just to match up time, people code like this
    int main() {
    int t = in();
    cout << ans <<"\n";
    after that if someone writes editorials like that imagine how difficult will it become for the person as a reader
    Neither the code nor the editorial is comprehensive.

I know I am sounding rude but sir I seriously respect your platform and love to use it.
All I mean to say is, you are delivering quality content
but if the content itself lacks quality due to small issue like these than what’s the worth
Only those people actually read the tutorial seriously who want to learn something, but If you expect that the person should be already trained enough, well-equipped with best approaches himself, to learn then i think it’s not possible.
Seriously Noobs like me are loosing a lot here

At the end, if you say that what about those whio missed the question just due to some small hint, why should they read the whole editorial
Ans to that is QUICK EXPLAINATION section, leave hints there. If someone would be so pro he would directly read it from there itself. And one can definitely scroll to the point he got wrong.

Hope you understand my point :slight_smile:
Anshul Garg
He only asked me to put it in front of you people and ask for suggestions, spamming editorials is not a way out
hope you find my points relevant!


I think all the points you mentioned are true

1 Like

Agree. But many problems require a large no. of Data Structure and Algorithm. If editorialist try to explain everything in detail, it will be very very long. Maybe 10 pages. And people are already complaining about long editorial ( 2 pages). Also, suppose I know segment tree, It will be frustrating to read about it on every editorial that contains segment tree.

Suggestion: Provide them in prerequisites (which is already being followed in editorials.) and attach some good links for the same

Not all are very good in English. Even though It should not be an excuse for mistakes. I think 2-3 mistakes should be excused. Even when someone’s grammar is bad, it is not that inconvenient to read it. Our brain ignores them automatically, given you are trying to find logic and not spelling mistakes. [ Applicable for me. Don’t know about others. ]

Agree there should not be such case. Hardly seen any on Official editorials.

Absolutely agree. Sometimes I feel like the codes are for Obfuscated coding contest. Well organized and commented solutions would be appreciated for editorials.

I don’t know about whom you are talking about. However, there is an editorialist who wrote his first editorial this month. Please bear with him for some time.