Anonymous user
User talk:Gerard Schildberger: Difference between revisions
→Regarding Whitespace: magic bullets, used up. -- ~~~~
(→Regarding Whitespace: Oh well ...) |
(→Regarding Whitespace: magic bullets, used up. -- ~~~~) |
||
Line 384:
::::: I think it is good to add output if you can and it's not too long, or add a statement that the output is the same as for another language example if you must. Sadly a lot of contributors share the view that if there is any way of completing the letter of the task without showing output - then they will not show it. <br>Oh well. That's life :-)<br> --[[User:Paddy3118|Paddy3118]] 19:20, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
:::::: For '''Binary digits''': ''The task is to output the sequence of binary digits for a given non-negative integer.'' Most programming examples used the three ''shoulds'': "The decimal value <tt> x </tt> should produce <tt> yyy </tt>", that's only three lines of output. As for the '''Count in octal''', the wording is certainly subject to interpretation: ''to produce a sequential count in octal, starting ... Each number should appear on a single line ...'' etc. Now, if the task was to write a program THAT produces a sequential count ... but the difference is (very) subtle. However, some of the examples DO NOT start at zero (as per the task's requirement), and if they did, some would show a blank (by suppressing all leading zeroes). Again, I won't poke that hornet's nest, I'll leave it to others to flag those as incorrect. I've used up my magic bullets. We could on and on about the lack of output (and/or it's hugeness), if a program is incorrect (or not), and doesn't show (correct or incorrect) output. If no output is shown, then it most likely can't be flagged as incorrect. I know enough of some languages, but not enough to start a "flagging" war. It's like pushing a chain uphill. I would hope that the programming examples on Rosetta Code would be exacting in that regard. Once an incorrect program doesn't meet or complete a task's requirement(s), than other programs may follow suit (because nobody flagged it as incorrect), saying, "my output is the same as the other's output(s)", or somesuch words. And so it goes. -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger|Gerard Schildberger]] 19:35, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
| |||