Talk:Play recorded sounds: Difference between revisions
Splits, organization and chrestomathy
(the existing examples are good) |
(Splits, organization and chrestomathy) |
||
Line 4:
General reply: On reflection, it would probably be better to split up the task so the examples of any one are more all of the same thing. However, I don't think categorizing by language rather than audio facility is appropriate because audio is not ''usually'' a language feature and the details depend far more on the audio facility than what language you talk to it in. Also, [[User:Short Circuit]] has expressed interest (on IRC yesterday) in expanding Rosetta Code to other types of comparison: libraries, algorithms, paradigms. (And a clarification by example: The two examples currently on the page, categorized under C# and Tcl headings, are not contrary to my suggestion because they are using (I assume) language-provided audio libraries.) --[[User:Kevin Reid|Kevin Reid]] 19:26, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
: I think a split is warranted; The task is rather broad, as it currently stands. I'm ambivalent about organizing by language or library for this particular task, because of (I hope) possible future changes to how displayed task example code is organized. And, yes, I'm still very much in favor of additional forms of chrestomathy; The more effective means with which code on Rosetta Code can be organized, cross-referenced and compared, the better it serves its goals of comparing programming concepts, enabling developers and designers and educating newcomers. --[[User:Short Circuit|Short Circuit]] 19:49, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
| |||