Anonymous user
Talk:Parse EBNF: Difference between revisions
→Making this a full task: not yet
(Make this a regular task) |
(→Making this a full task: not yet) |
||
| (2 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
Line 63:
==Making this a full task==
Why this task is still not a full task, why it's a draft? Let's make it just a regular task, we seem to have already some implementations. [[User:Avmich|Avmich]] 18:21, 19 January 2012 (UTC)
: There's been a lot of disagreement over what this task was supposed to be; there's no hurry to promote, especially when there is no consensus. (It's not like people solve these things for a full-time job either.) –[[User:Dkf|Donal Fellows]] 21:54, 19 January 2012 (UTC)
:: I think right now the task is clear enough - you get a string with grammar and an input string of the grammar's language, and you should check if the correspondence holds.
:: Promoting would add attention and may be someone would add a solution or two. [[User:Avmich|Avmich]] 23:36, 19 January 2012 (UTC)
::: It's definitely clearer than it was but it still needs work. The description is a bit thin and some of the questions asked here aren't really answered. Also with the clarification, it's harder to tell which examples are correct. Which EBNF to use (or if it even matters) if you declare which. The end result is if someone is just skimming along through tasks that might interest them then they have to do more work to understand this task over others. It's a disincentive. I think fixing the incorrect examples would do more than just removing draft. Right now it will look confused if promoted. I'd also suggest copying out the test input to the main page as there are only two. The tests page is still valuable for "more information". --[[User:Dgamey|Dgamey]] 03:06, 20 January 2012 (UTC)
| |||