Anonymous user
Talk:Flatten a list: Difference between revisions
m
→String editing examples marked incorrect: added a missing word in the text.
m (→String editing examples marked incorrect: added a missing word in the text.) |
|||
| (5 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown) | |||
Line 88:
:On the meat of your explanation: I do understand that lists can be represented as strings - I went to the trouble of 'stringifying' the tree example to make sure. C, as you pointed out, is the implementation language of many other languages, but an answer where C just called another interpreter would not help the site. I think that most people and most publicly available examples of a list on C would ''not'' base its internal representation on strings - it is a common enough training task and most of the answers will involve dancing pointers and mallocs. Even on Unix. You might also find that although there may outwardly be a relationship between TCL lists and strings, Tcl has made optimisations over the years and internally other, more optimised data structures might be transparently used for better performance (I am unsure of just which data structures are optimised though- maybe others can help me out here). --[[User:Paddy3118|Paddy3118]] 02:12, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
:: So sorry for all this buzz; my point was very simple, indeed, and by "vandalization-like" I did not mean there was an intentional real "vandalization", just a replacement made in good faith '''but''' that replaced a perfectly working implementation that had, in my opinion, a better "view" of the task; in these cases (two implementations that looks both right someway), I am for keeping the previous implementation; and expecially in this case where clearly the new implementation works at a different "level" (the ascii representation of a list, which is usually not so easily manageable as a "binary" representation of a list, which is what "we" usually have when we need a list). I would keep the "ascii solution" too, or maybe we should have more task doing smart manipulations on strings. --[[User:ShinTakezou|ShinTakezou]] 10:49, 16 October 2010 (UTC)
==String editing examples marked incorrect==
I have marked four examples as incorrect as they go against the spirit and intent of the task by merely manipulating a string form of the input to form the output as a string. The task points to the definition of a list datatype. there is no attempt to form a list datatype it's just character manipulation rather than list manipulations. --[[User:Paddy3118|Paddy3118]] ([[User talk:Paddy3118|talk]]) 21:32, 24 October 2017 (UTC)
: (Concerning the REXX language example) --- In the REXX language, there is ''only'' a string form (type), there is no other form. All values (of variables) are stored as (character) strings. There is no other way to store data in REXX. Because of this language feature (some might call it a limitation), I saw no reason to '''not''' create a REXX solution to this task, as the string form for the output is indistinguishable from a list form. I didn't interpret the task that the data must be ''in'' a list form. I believe that the REXX solution is in the spirit of the task in that the REXX solution <u>did work on the equivalent of the list</u> as specified in the task's preamble. -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger|Gerard Schildberger]] ([[User talk:Gerard Schildberger|talk]]) 22:06, 24 October 2017 (UTC)
:: How to stop the task degenerating into lots of new examples just editing strings? I am at a loss!
:: I do note however that [[Tree_traversal#REXX]] seems to do more of what seems to be list-like processing whereas this example treats the string as text. --[[User:Paddy3118|Paddy3118]] ([[User talk:Paddy3118|talk]]) 14:01, 25 October 2017 (UTC)
| |||