3 ms·
If the change is simple, i.e. obvious with an visual examination, or if the bug is straightforwardly presented in the stack trace, in a learning context it's im
by Aperocky 5y ago
If the change is simple, i.e. obvious with an visual examination, or if the bug is straightforwardly presented in the stack trace, in a learning context it's imo more helpful to have you go over the problem and arrive at that conclusion yourself.
I've had multiple instances with multiple different people that come to me with problems that are pretty much repeats - I've since adapted to "I'll give you hints but you'll need to figure out yourself" in the context of learning.
Obviously, only if the context is learning.
- toastercat 5y agoYes, I don't disagree that sometimes toiling over a problem yourself is the most rewarding. I think most people have experienced this. This is the purpose of exercises in textbooks. But most textbooks don't solely consists of exercises. I was responding to this idea of never giving direct answers, only always posing more questions, which I think has a high potential of backfiring. As another user pointed out in this comments thread, I believe the best approach to take is first get an understanding of what the student already knows and understands, how best they learn, and form your instruction around that.