Anonymous user
Rosetta Code:Village Pump/Task creation process discussion: Difference between revisions
Rosetta Code:Village Pump/Task creation process discussion (view source)
Revision as of 10:02, 5 August 2013
, 10 years agoUndo revision 165652 by 218.108.170.168 (talk) Removed Vandalism & blocked Vandal.
(→Three types of tasks: What I like about RC as reader & contributer.) |
(Undo revision 165652 by 218.108.170.168 (talk) Removed Vandalism & blocked Vandal.) |
||
| (7 intermediate revisions by 5 users not shown) | |||
Line 1:
{{Vptopic
|topic=Task creation process discussion
|summary=Question on what kinds of restrictions should be applied to creation of tasks
}}
===Many tasks versus many languages===
The new [[J]] and [[Python]] contributors are creating lots of new tasks in preference to solving existing tasks. Should we be providing guidance on the types of tasks suitable for Rosetta Code? Here are my ideas, feel free to contradict.
Line 44 ⟶ 48:
::Hm, ... could it be done (with efforts :( ) the following way? Adding ''hidden'' templates to tasks, like placeholders for all RC-known languages... when a user adds a language, ''automatically'' the template is superseded by the header|lang template... or the user ''simply'' must remove it by hand... Then the finding of a task unimplemented in the language X will be the same as the finding of a task implemented in the language X (Solutions by Language)... but I don't know the details of running a wiki, so maybe it is not a good idea...? --[[User:ShinTakezou|ShinTakezou]] 23:28, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
:::I'd like an automatic solution. Giving users too many instructions for adding an example may discourage it. I really think a bot is the best way. --[[User:Mwn3d|Mwn3d]] 02:19, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
: Well, the feature existed for [[User:ImplSearchBot|a few months]] this year. Needs to be replaced. --[[User:Short Circuit|Michael Mol]] 17:45, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
===New issue, if it is an issue===
Line 53 ⟶ 57:
::Partly I agree. But the lib should be widespread and common (considered almost standard) (?), and I've found no such a lib (if you know one, tell me —it must be simple, not like SunriseDD I've found... it is overdimensioned for this and other tasks... but as last resort I will try to learn and use this). If widespread or ''almost'' standard are not requirements, I would upload my "hash-table" implementation to my site and drop a link to it, I suppose theoretically there's nothing wrong in doing so, since we are not really interested in performance or what (what about this? Can I use libs I've created, of course as GPLed code?). The implementation's aim of my code was to be able to write the algorithm almost as a translation of Java code. --[[User:ShinTakezou|ShinTakezou]] 00:03, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
:::I suppose I could use [http://uthash.sourceforge.net/ uthash], it seems simple enough. Going to adapt the code, but not this night:D --[[User:ShinTakezou|ShinTakezou]] 00:25, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
:::: Just to say as currently ended: I've used Judy library... for LZW, I've created a subtask for "binary strings" (opinionable), which proved to be usable (not elegantly) in other tasks too; while I've kept a specialized "dictionary" implementation for LZW. --[[User:ShinTakezou|ShinTakezou]] 23:45, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
| |||