**We should be doing our best to avoid letting users pass with "Here's some code, go figure" answers.** These should all still reside in the "low quality" queue, and actually, we should be more active as a community in improving them.

I know [some users][1] score quite a lot from one-paragraph answers that contain code, but completely fail to explain what it does, <s>even if</s> especially if it's a bash one-liner.

In most cases where a one-liner does the job, it should be easy to give the OP more context to work with. For example, not everyone knows what parameter expansion can do in a shell, or what quoting really does and when it's important. Or when your script will break on files with spaces in them.

There are countless examples of those low quality answers that could do so much better in helping people *actually learn something*, and not just spoon-feeding them with ready meals.

----------

Perfect [recent example][2].

Another good example of what can be done is [this][3]. First revision:

> ![][4]

… more than 200 upvotes later:

> ![][5]

Even if it's just three characters of code.


  [1]: https://superuser.com/search?tab=newest&q=user:26316%20is:answer
  [2]: https://superuser.com/a/396567/48078
  [3]: https://superuser.com/a/324515/48078
  [4]: https://i.sstatic.net/Zn77N.png
  [5]: https://i.sstatic.net/QRnLD.png