Anonymous user
Talk:100 doors: Difference between revisions
m
→Output consistency: and yet another misspelling correction (''lone'' ──► ''long''). -- ~~~~.
m (→Output consistency: corrected misspelling of Fibonacci. -- ~~~~) |
m (→Output consistency: and yet another misspelling correction (''lone'' ──► ''long''). -- ~~~~.) |
||
Line 95:
:Some competition sites rigidly define I/O formats as entries are automatically checked but their is no such need on RC and I prefer to allow some flexibility in the output formatting (unless the [[Range extraction|task]] is about rigidly formatting output of course) --[[User:Paddy3118|Paddy3118]] 22:48, 23 June 2012 (UTC)
:: Yeah, I read the ''lively'' (if not downright heated) discussion on the Pascal's triangle thing). This wouldn't fall under the consistency "rule" as much as being correct (or just ''better'', ... I hate to use the phrase ''more correct''), which in almost most cases, is highly controversial and the may be the cause of many fistfights if the contenders are in close proximity. This is one place where indentation is almost universally used elsewhere, I've never seen the presentation of Pascal's triangle so abused before. (Ok, a right triangle is a triangle, but still I view it as a crime ..., well, a misdemeanor then). For you guys on the other side of the pond, ''misdemeanour''. You'd thunk that a little effort would've gone a
:: I view the triangle issue in the same vein as output (say) a list of primes or fibonacci numbers, you ''expect'' programmers to list them in ascending order, it's so normal of an expatation that nobody has to state the obvious ... until somebody doesn't. --- Whatcha mean, I can't output the numbers spelled out in English (or Spanish, or Mayan glyphs, or base 19 ...) ? -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger|Gerard Schildberger]] 23:14, 23 June 2012 (UTC)
| |||