I developed an answer to an algorithm question. But, though it remains very informal, this answer is already four or five pages long, because it is very technical. Does it make sense to post it? Should I limit my answer to a very sketchy description?
$\begingroup$
$\endgroup$
4
-
2$\begingroup$ To my knowledge, the only post that had this happen was the reference answer on P/NP by Kaveh. I have written some long answers myself but never touched that limit. If you truly need that much room, the question may have a serious scoping problem. (Which, in a way, is true for the reference questions where we went for broader scope on purpose.) $\endgroup$– Raphael ModCommented Sep 18, 2014 at 9:29
-
1$\begingroup$ Depending on the originality of the presented material, it may sometimes be prudent to publish it on arXiv and post only a summary here. I consider these answers by Realz Slaw an example for this. $\endgroup$– Raphael ModCommented Sep 18, 2014 at 9:35
-
4$\begingroup$ @Raphael cs.stackexchange.com/questions/16850/is-dominosa-np-hard/… as well. It's not always possible to judge how hard a question is a priori. $\endgroup$– Gilles 'SO- stop being evil' ModCommented Sep 18, 2014 at 9:36
-
1$\begingroup$ @Gilles True. That question was reasonably scoped; it just turned out to need a long answer. That's okay and not the scenario my "may" was alluding to. $\endgroup$– Raphael ModCommented Sep 18, 2014 at 9:37
Add a comment
|
1 Answer
$\begingroup$
$\endgroup$
7
The maximum length of a post is 30000 characters (in the Markdown source).
You can browse the longest answers on a site on the Data Explorer to see examples of long answers. The data explorer only provides the rendered HTML, not the Markdown source, so there will be a (usually small) discrepancy.
Please keep your answer as complete as possible. Thank you for writing a detailed, technical answer.
answered Sep 18, 2014 at 6:48
Gilles 'SO- stop being evil'ModGilles 'SO- stop being evil'
44k3 gold badges33 silver badges63 bronze badges
-
$\begingroup$ Thanks. Is the size determined by
StackExchange.realtime.subscribeToQuestion('419', '29709');in the HTML source? I went to the page you give, but what it computed were rather short answers with a negative size ... whatever that means !! Did I misuse it, or did I misunderstand you? $\endgroup$– babouCommented Sep 18, 2014 at 8:43 -
$\begingroup$ @babou Sorry, I only checked the title of that query. For some reason, it's displaying the shortest answers! I've now linked to a query that actually displays the longest answers (by rendered HTML, not by Markdown source, because SEDE doesn't have the source). $\endgroup$ Commented Sep 18, 2014 at 8:58
-
2$\begingroup$ I'd like to add, please keep your answer as concise as possible. Detail is great, rambling is not. (@babou) $\endgroup$– Raphael ModCommented Sep 18, 2014 at 9:29
-
$\begingroup$ @Raphael Rambling is bad but skipping useful information (such as proof steps) isn't. Clarity over concision. $\endgroup$ Commented Sep 18, 2014 at 9:36
-
2$\begingroup$ @Gilles That's why I write "as possible". As long as necessary, as short as possible. (Typically, the second half of the "rule" is the harder one to achieve!) $\endgroup$– Raphael ModCommented Sep 18, 2014 at 9:38
-
$\begingroup$ @Raphael I was expecting this point (conciseness) to crop up, and wondered whether I should mention it. I am aware that I tend to make longer answers, as I try, as much as possible to make didactic answers, and to emphasize what I consider fundamental structuring concepts. Do you feel I am rambling? $\endgroup$– babouCommented Sep 18, 2014 at 12:49
-
$\begingroup$ @babou I don't think I have read any of your (long) answers in full yet, so I don't have an opinion on that. I just wanted to add this piece of advice (a wish?) here because more people may read "keep as complete as possible" in the future. (Which needs to be restricted further, I think, along the lines of "short of reproducing material readily available online or in standard textbooks".) $\endgroup$– Raphael ModCommented Sep 18, 2014 at 12:52