Anonymous user
Talk:Fusc sequence: Difference between revisions
→Deletion vs variation: no no no
(→Deletion vs variation: no no no) |
|||
Line 13:
Rosetta code does not claim, and is not equipped, to present unique and canonical versions. It is not clear that such versions could in any case exist. Issues of compliance are less subjective, and more rigorous, if delegated to the tooling. Checking Python submissions with tools like pylint and autoPep8, for example, is clearly sensible and constructive. [[User:Hout|Hout]] ([[User talk:Hout|talk]]) 10:30, 11 March 2020 (UTC)
: I disagree (I'm the one who initially removed the old entry). I removed it not because it was slow (it was), but because it was insane. I agree that speed optimization is not the ultimate goal of this site, and I hope you agree that our goal is to be helpful for readers. The Haskell-styled python code is ''not'' helpful. How does a reader benefit from seeing it, besides the initial "Ooh, people do that?"
: For the supposed high virtues you listed, I see none in the code entry. Reliability? It's not proven, and it is not easy to prove by wading through 11 <code>def</code> blocks to ascertain its logic. Code refactoring and reuse? It's moot because no sane project would want to reuse this code when it takes less time to write something simpler from scratch. Code culture vary, sure, that's why there is a Haskell section up there somewhere, where you can find beautifully readable code, because you know, it is actually Haskell.
: If people come to read something in the Python section and sees this behemoth, it's a sign that we have failed miserably at being helpful. --[[User:Ledrug|Ledrug]] ([[User talk:Ledrug|talk]]) 05:24, 12 March 2020 (UTC)
| |||