Rosetta Code:Village Pump/Discouraging approaches: Difference between revisions
Content added Content deleted
(Added a topic :: "Discouraging approaches" The goals of Rosetta Code, and responding to each other's code.) |
(Where the code works and is well linted, but we disagree with the approach, we should quietly submit an additional draft.) |
||
Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
|summary=The goals of Rosetta Code, and responding to each other's code. |
|summary=The goals of Rosetta Code, and responding to each other's code. |
||
}} |
}} |
||
The landing page defines the goals of Rosetta Code in terms of: |
|||
# demonstrating "how languages are similar and different" |
|||
# aiding a person "with a grounding in one approach to a problem in learning another" |
|||
What happens when approaches to problem solving and the composition of code differ between users of the same language ? |
|||
My view is that diverging approaches are the life-blood of Rosetta Code, and that the creative response to difference is simply to submit alternative drafts. |
|||
Can I suggest that simple ground-rules for interventions in code submitted by others are developed and displayed in some accessible place ? |
|||
My draft proposal would be: |
|||
# Where code somehow fails to produce the specified output, or contains problems flagged up by a commonly used linter, we draw polite attention, and perhaps suggest specific edits, ideally to be made by the contributor |
|||
# Where we disagree with the approach, we refrain from using RC as a vehicle for "encouraging" or "discouraging" particular approaches, and simply offer an additional draft for contrast. |
|||
People feel strongly about their languages and coding practices, and this can easily degenerate into hostile and destructive interventions where code expresses an approach with which we disagree. |
|||
It seems to me that: |
|||
* the only interesting comment on standards compliance is one offered by a widely used linter, |
|||
* and the only creative and Rosetta-like comment on an approach with which we disagree is simply the submission of an alternative draft. |
|||
In terms of Rosetta's goals, some drafts will emphasise universal similarities, and others will emphasise particular differences. |
|||
All drafts provide interesting insight into differing approaches, and the optimisation of different types of value. |
|||
I don't think we should be vandalising each others (working and well-linted) code in the angry pursuit of personal visions of what is "to be encouraged" or what is "not be encouraged". |
|||
There are other forums for the pursuit of such arguments. |
|||
Does that seem to make sense ? [[User:Hout|Hout]] ([[User talk:Hout|talk]]) 12:48, 31 March 2021 (UTC) |