I've seen a few persons who were just looking for something simple, many times it really is because they have no clue. Therefore two or three things occurred to me:

1. The statement at the top of the LQ page:
   Quote:

   LinuxQuestions.org - where Linux users come for help

2. What have I done when I had no clue? I've searched the web using a term like "bubble sort C program example", to find actual code examples to start with. And then I've written my code and worked it to do what I want

One thing I can attribute to Stack Overflow is that when I Google for programming examples, they pretty much show up there. And not that I Google that site, but instead that when I Google, I get hits from that site.

I spend some time in the LQ Programming forum. There are largely C, C++, Python, and BASH questions as the predominant questions. Do we end up making it a teeth pulling exercise for those who ask questions? Sometimes. And when one of us says "Sure, here you go" and posts a complete script, sometimes we (self included) respond "Hey, they really should work this out on their own..."

I know there are fine lines, but I'm not sure people are asking for an entire application. Someone's asking how to get a highly specific result. OK fine, maybe some of them are homework questions. So what? Do we really care if someone gets a fake, inflated homework grade for copying our sort program? Ultimately we know that they'll have to put the proof in their pudding and step up for real if they are to be a true programmer and work in that field. We also know that they will do as we do and copy scripts, and source from examples as much as they can, to avoid reinventing the wheel.

I further agree that this is complicated because someone asks, "I need a script to sort 10 numbers." Someone gives it to them, and then suddenly, it becomes "Now I need those 10 numbers to be letters and I need the sort to be done in reverse." And simply handing someone something enables them to not learn how to accomplish things on their own. Half agree, half disagree. Why? Yes, they can Google and find it, they may just be lazy, however if they are totally lazy, then they won't even copy/paste/compile code I post or copy a script and try to run it. If they persist that they don't understand, at that point they are beyond help.

My thinking here is once again that I see code examples just out there, especially on stack overflow, the people who ask those questions accept them. Ultimately there have got to be some questioners here who can take a simple program or script as an answer, accept it, and then take their next steps on their own. If they are not even that capable, then we all do know that they will just merely not make it.

As far as a thread questions format, I don't know if there's a good way to just post simple examples. Meanwhile just answering, if you know it, with a simple example may just be more helpful.

This goes for commands, scripts, and programs. People after all ask for help with all of those things.

a bit rambling but i agree

I very rarely give a complete script or program, just the basic bits and leave stuff like error checking as an exercise for the op, sometimes I must admit I'll get lazy and post something like 'man e2fsck' when the OP is asking a very vague or gerneralized question, occasionally a question will pique my interest and I will go into more detail than usual, somtimes suppliing a complete script.

It's difficult sometimes to get the balance right between wanting to help and just wanting to say RTFM!

One of the most frustrating things is when you give someone (usually, a low post count poster) a set of pointers - you know, consider this aspect, start from this thing that you know how to do, work out how you are going to solve that, make sure that you don't make this mistake - and someone pops up with code that solves the OP's original problem.

It has really put me off that kind of thread.

Agreed!
A nunber of times I have advised a poster to try and at least start on the problem and then someone post's a complete reply and that's usually the last you will hear from the OP in that thread, it's quite frustrating.

It's hard for me to explain and I do not wish to drag on with the topic, I realize that the few responders have opposed this thought direction.

I do still feel that showing by example simple stuff is not so bad. For a couple of reasons:

1. Those examples are likely already out there
2. A new programmer does need a leg up by way of seeing examples
3. I'd rather they get an example from us and feel somewhat helped, other than becoming frustrated

I realize it's not a perfect world and once you give an inch they'll want a mile. First question they'll be asking how to write Hello World, and their very next reply asks how they now rewrite that to be an encryption program. If it's that ludicrous, then sorry, but you've jumped a quantum too fast.

As far as those who just never get it? OK that's also bad, and they'll likely never get it. So they're shown one direct example, again one example, and told what to do with it; how to debug it, how to learn from it, how to vary it. At that point, if they don't pick up on the concepts, it certainly seems a lost cause. Similarly if they ask some highly detailed follow up that's obviously directed towards much more work, then I would tell them that they need to now work on this some their self.

The next part of that is, the next time someone does ask, "How do I open a file and write my text into it?" they may see a question which answers it directly. And how is that different from a good question where the OP does get properly to an answer and then posts their exact code? How also is that different from a repeated question where one of us posts a link to a former thread which also has an exact code example?