Talk:Man or boy test: Difference between revisions

Content added Content deleted

Inline

Revision as of 23:05, 26 March 2008

Clarify!

As written, this task accomplishes absolutely nothing whatsoever. No functionality is mentioned or referenced. There's a pointer here on the discussion page to a gif file of a scan of an old article that does not specify any kind of algorithm whatsoever and no criteria for determining whether any piece of code is "valid" for this task.

The Knuth article touts a piece of code for testing something about the implementation of ADA compilers and thus any piece of code that does not compile as valid ADA fails the test as referenced.

The task description needs to be clarified at least to the point where the following question can be answered: The BASIC one-liner: 10 PRINT "-67" will output what appears to be "the correct result". Does that make it an entry for this task (I highly suspect it doesn't) and why not? Sgeier 17:05, 26 March 2008 (MDT)

Copyright issues

The fact that this page sprung into being with many language examples at once with code wrapped in <source> blocks makes me worry that the code was transwikied from somewhere like Literate Programs, which would be a copyright violation. Are you certain that you have permission to do this? (Hmm. I was going to point you at a Copyrights page, but I can't seem to find one.) --IanOsgood 10:35, 18 December 2007 (MST)

Rosetta Code:Copyrights? --Mwn3d 11:13, 18 December 2007 (MST)

It is copied from Wikipedia (as is indicated in the initial edit summary). It is probably ok to copy from Wikipedia, as it is also GFDL, but there should probably be a note somewhere on the page indicating where it comes from. Also, I am not sure if it is a point in just copy the content of another wiki, even if it is legal. Maybe this page should only contain new implementations, along with a link to the Wikipedia article. Ahy1 11:35, 18 December 2007 (MST)

Hi... I transplanted the page from wikipedia. Basically it is a matter of time before the wikipedia article get the other bulk of the code samples pruned. Wikipedia typically requires that content is notable, and wikipedia isn't typically a repository for code sample. Also... most the the examples are "original research" having been created by the contributor.

But having said that I would hate to loose the examples. Hence the transplant.

Of the code snippets, the two that were originated from further afield are the ALGOL 60 (being the absolute original created by Donald Knuth), and ALGOL 68 version that was derived from Charles H. Lindsey's version that appeared in ALGOL Bulletin. Being so small, are they copyrightable?

ps Sorry for the broken links. Does RosettaCode want pages for IT pioneers etc etc

NevilleDNZ 17:31, 18 December 2007 (MST)

I've updated Rosetta Code:Copyrights. Any suggestions on where to link to it to make it more easily found? --Short Circuit 18:41, 18 December 2007 (MST)

Add a link in Rosetta_Code:About, and maybe include a link at the bottom of each page with Privacy policy/About Rosetta Code/Disclaimers maybe.

Re: copyright of the Man_or_boy algorithm and derivatives, I attributed the sources for the Non-GPL versions. As far as the Donald Knuth and Charles H. Lindsey versions... I know there is a rule on fair usage, but I am not sure how far this goes. The algorithm was published in the ALGOL bulletin Number 17 - July 1964 [1]. I was very brief. The Charles H. Lindsey - AB52 December 1988 versions [2] embedded the Algol 68 version in a much larger document.

Maybe the ALGOL Bulletin itself has a more exacting/generous license. I am thinking that I will go back the wikipedia and get their thoughts. And if necessary delete both extracts in both wikis. Any thoughts?

NevilleDNZ 20:20, 18 December 2007 (MST)

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
+== Clarify! ==
+As written, this task accomplishes absolutely nothing whatsoever. No functionality is mentioned or referenced. There's a pointer here on the discussion page to a gif file of a scan of an old article that does not specify any kind of algorithm whatsoever and no criteria for determining whether any piece of code is "valid" for this task.
+The Knuth article touts a piece of code for testing something about the implementation of ADA compilers and thus any piece of code that does not compile as valid ADA <i>fails</i> the test as referenced.
+The task description needs to be clarified at least to the point where the following question can be answered:
+The BASIC one-liner: <tt>10 PRINT "-67"</tt> will output what appears to be "the correct result". Does that make it an entry for this task (I highly suspect it doesn't) and <i>why not?</i> [[User:Sgeier|Sgeier]] 17:05, 26 March 2008 (MDT)
 === Copyright issues ===
 The fact that this page sprung into being with many language examples at once with code wrapped in <source> blocks makes me worry that the code was transwikied from somewhere like Literate Programs, which would be a copyright violation. Are you certain that you have permission to do this? (Hmm. I was going to point you at a Copyrights page, but I can't seem to find one.) --[[User:IanOsgood|IanOsgood]] 10:35, 18 December 2007 (MST)
@@ Line 21: / Line 30: @@
 [[User:NevilleDNZ|NevilleDNZ]] 20:20, 18 December 2007 (MST)
-== This is not a task. ==
-As far as I can tell, nothing in particular is to be done here. No result to be achieved, no output to be generated, nothing to be computed, evaluated, processed. Maybe Don Knuth originally had some kind of description of what this was supposed to be doing, but as it is written, there are absolutely no criteria for verifying that any piece of code on this page actually "does the right thing".
-Here's my contribution: "puts {Manly Language}". If this is not a valid solution to this task, why? How would you test that? [[User:Sgeier|Sgeier]] 16:03, 7 February 2008 (MST) (confused)