Anonymous user
User talk:AnatolV: Difference between revisions
m
fixing typos + 1 reply
Thundergnat (talk | contribs) (→Obsessed??: I would prefer many things.... I am often disappointed.) |
m (fixing typos + 1 reply) |
||
Line 28:
"not enough is bad", but also: "Do not write code that needs comments."<br>
The good '''rule of thumb''' in this case is following: If function (method, etc.) is 5-10 lines of code or less then describe briefly function purpose and calling parameters only (if any).<br>
Here is another contradictory advise popular in many documents, books, etc.: "use '''white spaces''' to make code more readable". But, contrary, it is not a bad practice/habit to use minimal number of white spaces.<br>
If you are using languages that would be interpreted, e.g., Java, JavaScript, PHP, ASP/ASPX, etc., then all comments are usually deleted and code is shrunk as much as possible
to speed up processing time. So, keep well documented version of code in archive.<br>
'''Decorating code''' and using not related images are considered an "Internet graffiti"
by some authors/bloggers. But more often it is called just trash and spam.<br>
Regarding "preludes" here on RC I would say they are OK, but better place would be on related language page, e.g., with titles like "Interesting historical notes",
"Useful XXX language tips", etc.<br>
The main reason: task pages becoming too big and looking through
Here is another sample. My VoeLib.gp page (pure text file) on OEIS Wiki became too big, and I've got automatic Wiki message: "Your page is bigger than 32K. Please reduce its size. Some browsers can't
handle big pages". This forced me to split my page into 2 pages. Soon we will have the same problem here on RC.
Line 66:
:::I try to pick my battles. Coding style is usually not one of them. I made that suggestion solely to point out that if it bothers you, you have the power to do something about it.
:::I am not aware of there being any restrictions on the number of logins anyone (who hasn't been completely blocked) can make, admin or not. I get the "You have cookies disabled" notice about 1 out of 5 times I try to log in. Usually if I wait 30 seconds or so and retry it goes through the second time. Not always, but usually. --[[User:Thundergnat|Thundergnat]] ([[User talk:Thundergnat|talk]]) 22:59, 6 March 2017 (UTC)
::::Thundergnat: I know for sure how busy you are doing editing job. RC should have a dozen of active editors (not 2-3 like now).
::::Regarding restricting logins with fake messages: It was proven by me in discussion with other admin. Please find it here on this page below.
::::[In Chrome: 1st click on page; then type [Ctrl+f]; then type in popped-up find bar: FAKE. That's it.]
==Hailstone sequence version 2 (& not ONLY)==
Line 83 ⟶ 86:
: Yes, there're a '''lot''' of output(s) that is/are incorrect and/or wrong, and also missing completely, and some that don't even address some (or all) of the output requirements, and still others that show something completely different. I'm not a Rosetta Code administrator, so I try to tread pretty lightly, especially after I got into a tiff (well, tiffs) with a particular user (who eventually became the only user to be banned for life from Rosetta Code) --- and this was after he was warned and banned twice (as I recall). Ever since then, I felt like I was tarnished (with a pretty wide brush after that cyber bullying) and I've been pretty hesitant when flagging programming examples (or their output) with an ''incorrect flag''. Your replies have made me realize that flagging others would be a costly endeavor and incur too much wrath (or flame wars?) for correcting such a simple error. -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger|Gerard Schildberger]] ([[User talk:Gerard Schildberger|talk]]) 06:22, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
'''Last''', I’ve discovered that RosettaCode Wiki using '''FAKE''' messages to limit login of certain users to pages. This is not nice and not correct.
| |||