Talk:Draw a clock

From Rosetta Code
Revision as of 19:39, 20 July 2011 by rosettacode>Mwn3d ("Clock" seems fine to me)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

What is supposed to happen here? I could not get the C code to compile. --Rdm 01:50, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Oh sorry, should have said it's C99, gcc -std=c99 -Wall -lm stuff.c, for example. --~~
Ok, I built it
<lang bash>$ CFLAGS=-std=c99 make clock</lang>
but when I run it my display does not look very clock like:

 :--::...  :----------:: . ..::--- *%* . c&- .-.c&: .-:.aa:  :-. :&c.  :-. -&c  :-: -#*

could you maybe post a screenshot or something? Thanks. --Rdm 13:30, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
I changed a code a little, it should work now (your terminal's interpretation of carriage return is different from mine). "Screenshot":<lang>
                . *%*                  
              .:-- .:-:                
             :----.  .--.              
           .----:      :-:.            
         .:---:.        .:-:.          
         .:-:.            .:-:         
                            .--. </lang>

Because the task is called "Draw a clock", rather than "Draw a timer" maybe we should have something about a clock in it. Perhaps: As an option show the face of an analogue clock with animated hour minute and second hands. (or alternatively rename to "Draw a timer". Markhobley 17:43, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Isn't the task description specific enough? --Ledrug 19:14, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
Yeah it is. But it is not really about drawing a clock. We could rename this "Draw a timer". Markhobley 19:31, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
FWIW, We could have a task for drawing an analogue clock, which includes showing the numbers round the face, and the animated hour, minute, and second hands. That would be better suited to "Draw a clock". Markhobley 19:35, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
What does a "timer" look like? Do you mean a stopwatch? "Timer" to me means a text clock (i.e. "00:00:00.000"), which is not what this task wants. I think "clock" is a nice general word to cover lots of possibilities (though not the obviously silly suggestion of a mouth counting "one on thousand"), and it's a word that people use more commonly. "Analog" would be a welcome addition to make sure people don't print numbers alone. --Mwn3d 19:39, 20 July 2011 (UTC)