Revision as of 13:33, 28 January 2012

Summary

What are, or should be, the Rosetta Code conventions for dialects of programming languages - implementations on specific platforms that may have minor differences of syntax and functionality from the official distributions?

Discussion

I would rather have different dialects not count as language of their own. Otherwise we have many main languages, which are similar in many ways, and many more items to show the code for. The navigation gets cluttered up and language lists would need to be structured in a hierarchy. This is already a problem with ZX80 Basic and C64 Basic and maybe more variants.

I propose

have an entry page for the dialect which redirects to the main language
allow different, dialect specific implementations of the same problem on the page of the "main" language.

Codecop 13:33, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

@@ Line 3: / Line 3: @@
 |summary=What are, or should be, the Rosetta Code conventions for dialects of programming languages - implementations on specific platforms that may have minor differences of syntax and functionality from the official distributions?
 }}
+I would rather have different dialects not count as language of their own. Otherwise we have many main languages, which are similar in many ways, and many more items to show the code for. The navigation gets cluttered up and language lists would need to be structured in a hierarchy. This is already a problem with ZX80 Basic and C64 Basic and maybe more variants.
+I propose
+* have an entry page for the dialect which redirects to the main language
+* allow different, dialect specific implementations of the same problem on the page of the "main" language.
+[[User:Codecop|Codecop]] 13:33, 28 January 2012 (UTC)