5 ms·
It's not meant to be flippant, although I see I should have chosen better wording. It's meant to go right into the next point: I spent time solving a challenge,
by noxToken 9y ago
It's not meant to be flippant, although I see I should have chosen better wording. It's meant to go right into the next point: I spent time solving a challenge, but the site will not let me validate it without creating an account.
Sometimes the challenges take 30 seconds. Other times, you may spend over 30 minutes working on something more challenging. Who wants to spend time working on a challenge only to be told, "Wait a sec. You need to register before I tell you if you were correct." If I am presented with an input field, I would expect that I am allowed to submit that input. And that's where the dime a dozen comment comes from. If I try to accomplish the task your site has given me but there's an unexpected roadblock imposed by the site itself, why would I stay on that site when I can go elsewhere?
If registration is required, it should say so up front. Allow users to browse challenges. Even allow users to view the full challenge text. However, disable the input field if they must register first. It otherwise implies that I can solve the challenge without an account. You don't want to mislead your potential users.
I supposed I should have said something like, "There are many code challenge sites available. It is imperative to give users a positive experience, because users can easily go elsewhere for something similar." I did not mean to be insulting.
- Method-X 9y agoWhat about putting a small banner / notice right above the code editor that explains the user must register before executing code? I'm honestly not intentionally trying to create an annoying site, it's just when you have users running code you legitimately have to take some security precautions. I'll put some thought into how I can communicate this to the user... My favorite idea so far is to just let the user execute code X number of times and then prompt for registration.
- noxToken 9y agoI am sympathetic to your reasoning. I am terrible at design, but I think almost anything would be better than what you have. An obvious banner works well. Allowing a few attempts works well, but in that case, how do you rate limit someone executing code without an account?
- lgas 9y agoHaving an account tied to the execution of the code does nothing to help with security. I can still register with a bogus email account and then run code anonymously. This doesn't inconvenience attackers, only legit users.
- happy-go-lucky 9y ago> This doesn't inconvenience attackers, only legit users. You just nailed it.