User talk:Dgamey

From Rosetta Code

Welcome to RC. Short Circuit should be along presently to "officially" greet you. (I'm not an admin, just another user.)

Just a little side note: when editing, it's polite to include something in the summary that says what you've done -- for example, if you add a new solution to a task, it's nice to put something like "added language" in the summary so that others can see what you've done.

Sorry if this comes across as a bit brusque; I just can't think of a better way to phrase it. -- Eriksiers 08:31, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

Gah. I prefer that greeting to be more "personal" than official, and the timing of it depends on when I have a few minutes. :P --Michael Mol 16:14, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

Of course; we've already exchanged a couple emails over the last couple days. :) Welcome to Rosetta Code! I'm Mike, and I noticed you created an account.

Some quick things you should be aware of:

Template:Mylang Helps you show what languages you're familiar with, and helps us become aware of skills with languages we haven't seen.
Category:Unimplemented tasks by language A place to find tasks missing solutions in various languages.
Blogs, twitter, facebook... We have them, and are interested in yours.
Special:Webchat Logs you into #rosettacode on the Freenode IRC channel. Not usually the most active communications medium, but occasionally helpful. It's logged at http://irclog.perlgeek.de/rosettacode/today.
Rosetta Code:Village Pump A general Q/A and discussion area.
Rosetta Code:Finances For most of Rosetta Code's history, expenses have been paid out of my pocket. I can't afford that much longer, and so you can see the state of Rosetta Code's finances, and how you may help. If you enjoy or are excited about the site, please consider reading through it.

Sorry for the boilerplate; it can be a bit difficult giving an individual greeting to each person. If you post information about your technical interests and background, I'll probably read it. If you already have put that kind of information on your user page, I probably already have; I'm always interested in how people do and can benefit from Rosetta Code. --Michael Mol 16:14, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

Unimpl_page[edit]

You might be able to do a conditional text component as "if we're talking about X, add this language-specific text". There may be a way to genericize that, too. I'd poke User:Kevin Reid and User:Mwn3d; they're more fluent with parser funcs than I am. User:Coderjoe or User:Ce might be able to quickly come up with an inline query for all content with a "notes for unimpl in x" property or some such. --Michael Mol 19:52, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

Jcon - Language or implementation[edit]

I've noticed that you didn't like my edit to the Jcon category page. But as I understand it, Jcon is an implementation and not a proper language. If you go to Jcon you will notice that all the content is still there (just not categorized as a language). And you yourself have included it on Category:Icon_Implementations. Additionally the Jcon site, the Icon site and also Wikipedia describe Jcon as an implementation instead of a language. So I don't really understand why you insist on listing Jcon as a language on Rosetta Code. --Andreas Perstinger (talk) 16:27, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

I'd be happier if it was an alias rather than blanked out which is what it looked like this morning. It didn't look like the information was all there. --Dgamey (talk) 22:13, 16 March 2014 (UTC)
You mean the Jcon page should redirect to the Icon page: Jcon? And the same for Category:Jcon?
Isn't the relationship Jcon/Icon comparable to JRuby/Ruby, Jython/Python or JTcl/Tcl? In all these cases there is a language page (which redirects to the category page) and if you click on "xxx Implementations" (in the section "Subcategories") you get an overview of all language implementations on RC where each implementation has its own page (but no category page).
Copying that structure was my intention.--Andreas Perstinger (talk) 17:54, 17 March 2014 (UTC)
Hmmm ... this seems to different than I recall. Consistency is better. Go for it. --Dgamey (talk) 18:48, 17 March 2014 (UTC)
Sorry for the delay, but I somehow missed your agreement for the changes. --Andreas Perstinger (talk) 19:02, 27 May 2014 (UTC)

Clipper / Harbour / XBase =[edit]

Do you have any objection to Clipper and Harbour being stored under an XBase heading in task solutions? It would seem to me better than duplicating code under separate Clipper and Harbour headings.Axtens (talk) 12:59, 8 June 2014 (UTC)