Talk:FizzBuzz: Difference between revisions

:::::I suggest one subpage for examples where the number of lines is a multiple of three... —[[User:Sonia|Sonia]] 22:07, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

::::::One for where the number of lines is a multiple of Fizz, and another for where it is a multiple of Buzz! All other solutions to be marked as wrong… –[[User:Dkf|Donal Fellows]] 22:27, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

 

== Missing from Solutions by Programming Task Category ==

 

FizzBuzz doesn't show up on the [[Category:Solutions by Programming Task]] page.

 

==Too many versions for some languages==

 

:: I also disagree --- ''only keeping the one(s) showing the language in best light should be kept''   --- is very subjective, who is able to say that other versions are kinda OK, but MY version is the bestus and shows off the language better than the others   (possibly implying that the quality of other versions aren't up to scratch).   But putting the joking aside, each version (most likely) demonstrates how to do a very simple task in different ways, I prefer simplicity (for understanding) and easy expandability (such as possibly adding a   '''Jazz'''   option for multiples of 7   and/or others --- for instance).   Just because the requirements are so simplistic, it doesn't mean that we have to prune the examples down to a couple (or whatever number).   Besides, it's not like they are consuming a vast amount of space.   I think each example shows how to solve the task using different approaches (or algorithms).   Once we start pruning computer programming examples, where does it stop? --- And who does the pruning?   Who gets to decide that one version isn't that much different than another?   Certainly, a few comments in the code (or prologue) would help immensely for some of the "trickier" and/or obtuse algorithms (or heaven help us all, obfuscated code) --- but then I'm not a huge fan of code golf (albeit, sometimes it's hard to distinguish between   ''shortness of code''   and;   ''concise code'') --- although it seems that there are a lot of examples that seem to preach that idea (as demonstrated by the number of programming examples in the various Rosetta Code tasks).   Of course, it's possible that my observations are somewhat jaded a bit. -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger|Gerard Schildberger]] ([[User talk:Gerard Schildberger|talk]]) 00:33, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

 

===Here are the five versions as they were:===

 

Now the above is just my opinion, and we ''could'' just have an edit war on version 4 and 5, but I would prefer to get your reasons for keeping them as, as you have stated, other tasks may have similar numbers of examples for similar reasons. I am trying to get a good task page with good, idiomatic code for each language. If you think my idea is duff then please explain your reasoning too (Not just Hajo, every RC user willing to express an opinion). Hopefully I can learn from how my ideas are shot down too (ouch).<br>:-)<br> --[[User:Paddy3118|Paddy3118]] ([[User talk:Paddy3118|talk]]) 23:26, 19 November 2014 (UTC)