Following up on this question (and its answers), I was recently confronted with one of Stephane's answers in the LQPRQ. I commented that he should know better, he responded that awk code is self-explanatory and no further explanation is necessary. In some sense there is a point, as: what else should there be? - The answers solves the question. However, not everyone speaks awk as fluently as him, so the whole issue of code-only answers is still bothering me.
Moreover, once in a while I come across other users' code-only answers in the LQPRQ, and my (preliminary) take on those is that they "Look OK", where I leave to the users to judge whether the solution works or not.
Yet, I am not certain whether this is the right thing to do (bearing in mind the question what else should there be if the code answers the question?).
Is there a more precise guideline for such cases? How do sites like SuperUser or StackOverflow handle this?