Anonymous user
Talk:Flatten a list: Difference between revisions
→(Only appeared) Vandalization-like modification to C code
(→Vandalization-like modification to C code: Intermediate representation, task description, and relax) |
|||
Line 48:
::::: On that 64 bit vista system, running Chrome, text which is not bolded still looks wrong. For example: [[Compile-time_calculation#J]]. (It looks fine in IE. I did not install firefox.) Anyways, it is not clear that bold is the issue. --[[User:Rdm|Rdm]] 11:55, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
== (Only appeared) Vandalization-like modification to C code ==
Take a look at the history and the C code. It seems it was removed a correct implementation, replaced or "prefixed" with a imagined silly conversation, and then replaced with a code that works on the ASCII representation of (non generic) list, but it is no way useful to flatten a '''real''' and "general" list held in memory; to me that code does not solve the task, since the ASCII representation of a list is not what we usually have when dealing with lists; the previous removed code did. I'll fix it back if no strong motivation for keeping the current silly and simplistic tricky implementation is given. --[[User:ShinTakezou|ShinTakezou]] 10:15, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
Line 84:
:
: All in all, relax; this sounds to me like a case where the task description could require clarification. And I think Paddy's intuition might be right; you should stick around and get a feel for how things work. Keep participating, and look at those items I left in your talk page about recommended reading and such; I'm still looking forward to your participation. :) --[[User:Short Circuit|Michael Mol]] 00:57, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
:Hi Paul, thanks for going to so much effort to explain your example. As you can see, we do value your participation and I would hate for you to give up participation in the site. We need new contributors as well as readers.
: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)
| |||