Anonymous user
Talk:Calendar - for "REAL" programmers: Difference between revisions
Talk:Calendar - for "REAL" programmers (view source)
Revision as of 15:50, 11 November 2013
, 10 years ago→Delete?
m (added a shorter ASCII Snoopy. -- ~~~~) |
|||
Line 4:
I kind of disagree. Programming on a 6-bit (aka UPPERCASE only) platform is a legitimate pursuit. The K&R C programming language specifically permitted it, so to also PL/I, FORTRAN, COBOL... etc. There were and are still many legitimate CPU architectures that are intrinsically 6-bit, hence UPPERCASE.
:I agree that it should be deleted. This is an absurd requirement and is totally uninteresting code-wise (either the language is case-sensitive or it isn't) ... even in the unlikely event that you care about computer with 6-bit words these days, you could always write a compiler that accepted ASCII or even Unicode source, loading it into multi-word encodings. (Or more likely you would just cross-compile, since you wouldn't want to actually do your work on a 6-bit machine nowadays.) [[User:Stevengj|— Steven G. Johnson]] ([[User talk:Stevengj|talk]]) 15:50, 11 November 2013 (UTC)
===Examples===
Line 75 ⟶ 77:
:The task description says "Create another algorithm", yet the Algol solutions are identical (except for the case).--[[User:Abu|Abu]] 15:06, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
I get your drift.... rewording task: Provide an algorithm ... presented entirely without lowercase. ThanX for pointing it out. [[User:NevilleDNZ|NevilleDNZ]] 03:58, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
==another ASCII version==
| |||