Rosetta Code talk:Add a Task: Difference between revisions

I certainly like the requirement for an implementation. It almost always makes things much easier for other implementers if they can study a working example. Perhaps the requirement for graduating a task from draft status should be taken to be multiple implementations of it and a consensus that the task is clear enough (typically formed by having multiple implementations that people can agree are all correct). –[[User:Dkf|Donal Fellows]] 21:06, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

: Hi Donal, I would think that you don't actually have a task, draft or not, without that first implementation. They go together for me.<br> I don't often use the draft task status, and its usually when I find something that interests me, but I am unsure of wider interest, or might shift the focus of a task, as in [[Talk:Simple Quaternion type and operations]], and [[Talk:Short-circuit evaluation]], and [[Talk:Extreme floating point values]], and [[Horner's rule for polynomial evaluation]] - started as a draft I think because I couldn't get the formatting of the equations in the description right. --[[User:Paddy3118|Paddy3118]] 05:47, 22 September 2010 (UTC)