Rosetta Code:Village Pump/Old main talk

This site desperately needs syntax highlighting. I strongly suggest using geshi with the mediawiki extension (it's in the svn extensions dir). See http://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7163 --en:Yurik --67.151.90.174 12:49, 21 January 2007 (PST)

With the myriad of languages used, I'm not sure an automatic syntax-highlighting system would be effective. I'll look into it, though. Meanwhile, CSS-based coloring schemes can be done by hand, but that would require a huge amount of work. (It's already difficult enough to keep up with simple styling.) --Short Circuit 12:42, 23 January 2007 (EST)

Simple guess out of the blue here, but couldn't we add css syntax highlighting, or mod mediawiki to highlight the code based on the category in which the code is placed ? Plus, a lot of languages have the same basic syntax, PHP/C/C++/JS would look terribly better, and that's only with one syntax highlighter... --CrashandDie 14:09, 25 January 2007 (EST)

Copying from Wikipedia

As you may already know, wikipedia supplies samples of code in 'pseudocode'. Would it make sense to copy these across from wiki to here (placed in its own 'pseudocode language section). Maybe then others may use these as a base for translating them into one of the 'usable' codes. There shouldn't be any legal issues in doing this, should there? --Oatzy 18:47, 25 January (GMT)

As a blanket rule, if you copy from Wikipedia, include a citation with a link to the specific version of the page copied from. I don't know that the GFDL requires it, but I will. :-) I'll mention this in the Copyrights page. --Short Circuit 13:57, 25 January 2007 (EST)

Things needed

1) A village pump type page (like wikipedia has) where this kind of stuff can be put

2) Better segregation of language types. For instance, is LaTeX really a programming language? As a markup language, it's as much a programming language as HTML is IMO. (Of course, HTML could be added instead), should completely different codes be on their own page?

3) Better guidelines as to what code should be placed. Is something that will run on it's own required, or just enough lines to complete the task (for instance, the part of a C++ program which will print "goodbye world" is: std::cout "goodbye world\n"; but that wouldn't compile on its own. On the other hand a BASIC compiler (or interpreter) will complete the task with: print "goodbye world", but it wouldn't really be a complete program (missing a line number and 'end' or 'system' at the end). So should people place: Only the code that completes the requirements? or; Enough code to get it to compile, dependent on how lax the compiler in question is? or; A program that is completed to specifications and accomplishes the task?

4) A copy of (or a link to) the GFDL1.2 that is easily visible.

62.252.32.16 17:57, 22 January 2007 (EST)

1) Click on Feedback on the left.

2) Once I get time to work on categorization, that'll happen. I need more people to step up and work on keeping style standards high.

3) I'll work on clarifying the tasks to that end. Something like Control Structures clearly doesn't require a full program, while something like File I/O does.

4) Click on the GNU FDL icon in the bottom-left corner of any page. --Short Circuit 12:39, 23 January 2007 (EST)