User talk:Gerard Schildberger: Difference between revisions

 

:: That you didn't (or couldn't) perceive any Whitespace source is very likely the fault of your browser; GeSHi supports Whitespace by displaying spaces on a blue background, tabs on pink. Perhaps I've misunderstood, and you're merely suggesting using <tt>S</tt> and <tt>T</tt> instead? Either way, a language's inscrutability shouldn't disqualify its otherwise valid solutions; very few people can "read" brainfuck in any meaningful sense, but I doubt you'd raise the same objection against it. I do understand that Whitespace is something of a "joke" language, but the fact of the matter is that its Turing-completeness alone should be sufficient to warrant its inclusion on the pages of Rosetta Code. It's also worth noting that I've taken the liberty of including pseudo-Assembly equivalents with all of my Whitespace solutions to more legibly illustrate what the code is doing. As for flagging for missing output, it seems the kind of thing that would best be served by common sense. [[User:Isopsephile|Isopsephile]] 18:00, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

 

::: (Yes, you misunderstood, I am NOT suggesting using what you described --- concerning the '''S''' and '''T'''s.) I use Aurora (Firefox 21.0a2) for all my internet needs. I see that Firefox renders all of Whitespace programs as pure blanks on my system, while Microsoft's Internet Explorer shows "blocked" colors (for matters of privacy, speed, and such; I don't/won't use MS IE). So it appears that I would have to use MS IE to even view the Whitespace programs on Rosetta Code. I never had even thought of not including or excluding languages (because or lack of valid solutions or any other criteria, joke languages not withstanding). My (incorrect) flagging was based on lack of output as per the task's requirements (you had removed my incorrect flag ''in toto'', and I was just about to remove the ''missing source'' part of the incorrect flag). I can understand your sensitivity to having one language example marked as incorrect while there are others also incorrect (missing output). That doesn't make it correct, however. Most likely, if somebody else marks the others as incorrect, the incorrect flags would probably just be removed anyway, with the same reasoning. I won't poke that hornet's nest again. Having a discussing about what is incorrect vs. correct, me thinks, in this context is a fruitless endeavor and probably nothing will be resolved. If missing output (as per the task's requirements) isn't incorrect, then will the flags that I've observed for (other) incorrect flags for missing output (in other Rosetta Code tasks) be removed or amended? Most likely not. -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger|Gerard Schildberger]] 18:49, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

:::: I do not read the task as requiring the output to be shown, merely "produced" to some destination unspecified. The fact that the output is arbitrarily large only reinforces this interpretation, to my mind. --[[User:TimToady|TimToady]] 19:00, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

 

 

:::::: For '''Binary digits''': ''The task is to output the sequence of binary digits for a given non-negative integer.'' &nbsp; Most programming examples used the three ''shoulds'': &nbsp; "The decimal value <tt> x </tt> should produce <tt> yyy </tt>", &nbsp; that's only three lines of output. &nbsp; 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. &nbsp; Now, if the task was to write a program THAT produces a sequential count ... but the difference is (very) subtle. &nbsp; 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). &nbsp; Again, I won't poke that hornet's nest, I'll leave it to others to flag those as incorrect. &nbsp; I've used up my magic bullets. &nbsp; 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. &nbsp; I know enough of some languages, but not enough to start a "flagging" war. &nbsp; It's like pushing a chain uphill. &nbsp; I would hope that the programming examples on Rosetta Code would be exacting in that regard. &nbsp; 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. &nbsp; And so it goes. -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger|Gerard Schildberger]] 19:35, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

::::::: Another consideration is that for some tasks such as these, the output is Very Boring, and accomplishes little except to obscure the solutions. --[[User:TimToady|TimToady]] 19:53, 18 March 2013 (UTC)