Talk:RC POP.OUT: Difference between revisions

← Older edit

Talk:RC POP.OUT (view source)

Revision as of 05:05, 6 May 2019

8,228 bytes added , 5 years ago

m

→‎Category vs. solution: added a comment.

Anonymous user

rosettacode>Gerard Schildberger

Revision as of 04:58, 28 May 2015 (view source) rosettacode>Gerard Schildberger (→‎language popularity: added a showing of the before-and-after boxed html text(s), other comments.) ← Older edit		Latest revision as of 05:05, 6 May 2019 (view source) rosettacode>Gerard Schildberger m (→‎Category vs. solution: added a comment.)
(18 intermediate revisions by 5 users not shown)
Line 97: ::::::: (replying to the newer text):   I read the requirement:     ''Sort most popular programming languages based in number of members in Rosetta Code categories ...''     exactly as stated.   I saw no need to judge that requirement and conclude that he meant anything different than other what he wrote.   The word '''popularity''' was clearly defined within the same sentence, and even stated where to get the needed data. -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger\|Gerard Schildberger]] ([[User talk:Gerard Schildberger\|talk]]) 04:58, 28 May 2015 (UTC) ::::::::Gerard if you look at the history tab I did NOT change my post AFTER you posted. You said "Please don't do major editing to your text '''after''' I have replied/responded to it". That did not happen. I'm free to edit my post before anyone else has replied to it. The time stamp between my first and second edit was all of 5 minutes, I was still working on it! -- [[User:3havj7t3nps8z8wij3g9\|3havj7t3nps8z8wij3g9]] ([[User talk:3havj7t3nps8z8wij3g9\|talk]]) 14:11, 28 May 2015 (UTC) : Even so, I took the ('''original''') task's description/requirements from the task, not it's discussion/talk page, or for that matter, some expectation.   I would have expected that the task's requirements and/or description would be discussed first (at least by the original author of the Rosetta Code task) before it was changed.   The task still states (and implies) that popularity is based on the number of members in (from) the category page, and I used (for the REXX version) the   ''languages''   page to filter out the non-language entries from the category page.   That may not be what some expectations are, but that is what I used when I entered the REXX language entry.   I don't use the ''title'' for a task's requirement, only the task's (requirements) text. -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger\|Gerard Schildberger]] ([[User talk:Gerard Schildberger\|talk]]) 02:14, 28 May 2015 (UTC) ::Yeah that's fine and understood. It's not your fault. Many people have seen the flaw in the task description section and programmed according to "popularity" and not "members". -- [[User:3havj7t3nps8z8wij3g9\|3havj7t3nps8z8wij3g9]] ([[User talk:3havj7t3nps8z8wij3g9\|talk]]) 04:13, 28 May 2015 (UTC) Line 121 ⟶ 124: : "Struck"     <big> <nowiki> <strike> ··· </strike> </nowiki> </big>     (after being moved)   by:   -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger\|Gerard Schildberger]] ([[User talk:Gerard Schildberger\|talk]]) 00:25, 28 May 2015 (UTC) ---- ==Kotlin?== So.. has Kotlin achieved a higher plane of existence? It seems to have disappeared completely from the rankings despite it having the most examples. ----[[User:Thundergnat\|Thundergnat]] ([[User talk:Thundergnat\|talk]]) 13:04, 15 May 2018 (UTC) ::Hehe, looks like reaching a 1,000 tasks is a 'black hole' in the RC POP.OUT. Expect to see other languages disappear as they reach the 'event horizon'. --[[User:PureFox\|PureFox]] ([[User talk:PureFox\|talk]]) 14:21, 15 May 2018 (UTC) ::: Yes, I identified the problem with the REXX program logic, it was looking at the   ''members''   follow-on keyword, and   ''if''   it wasn't numeric, it was ignored.   A string with a comma in it isn't considered numeric in the REXX language, so I changed the program to remove any commas before checking for a numeric string.   I suspect, as you do, that other (most?) computer programming entries will also fail.   -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger\|Gerard Schildberger]] ([[User talk:Gerard Schildberger\|talk]]) 18:14, 15 May 2018 (UTC) :: I wasn't sure whether the problem was the extra digit or the comma but I knew you'd soon sort it out :) As you say, there are probably not many languages which can identify a string of digits with thousand separators as being numeric without further ado. Kotlin certainly can't. --[[User:PureFox\|PureFox]] ([[User talk:PureFox\|talk]]) 18:37, 15 May 2018 (UTC) ==Mathematica vs Wolfram Language== (Changed a word in the talk section title from '''Mathmatica''' to '''Mathematica'''.)     -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger\|Gerard Schildberger]] ([[User talk:Gerard Schildberger\|talk]]) 23:38, 10 February 2019 (UTC) What difference between: <pre> rank: 22 (743 entries) Mathematica rank: 80 (257 entries) Wolfram Language </pre> is RC.POP.OUT making? Is the 24 game included in Mathmatica? --[[User:Nigel Galloway\|Nigel Galloway]] ([[User talk:Nigel Galloway\|talk]]) 14:47, 10 February 2019 (UTC) <br> ----- <br> If you meant   '''Mathematica''',   then yes, the   '''24 game'''   is included in the count for   '''Mathematica'''.     -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger\|Gerard Schildberger]] ([[User talk:Gerard Schildberger\|talk]]) 23:09, 10 February 2019 (UTC) '''RC_POP.REX'''   is the name of the REXX program. The (or my) REXX program isn't making any decision.   It uses two files for input: ::*   Categories     {http://www.rosettacode.org/mw/index.php?title=Special:Categories&limit=5000)} ::*   Category:Programming_Languages     {http://www.rosettacode.org/wiki/Category:Programming_Languages} It scans the 1<sup>st</sup> file for (any) categories, and each category is checked against the 2<sup>nd</sup> file to verify that it is a computer programming language known to Rosetta Code.   If it passes the verification,   then it's a computer language that is used on Rosetta Code,   and the number of entries (programming examples) is taken from the   '''members'''   keyword.   No distinction or decision was made on my part or the REXX program's part between the aforementioned computer programming languages. I suspect that various peoples used one name instead of the other (interchangeably). If someone with god-like powers would make an executive decision to use one over the other, I suppose someone would write a script to change all the uses of one computer programming language into the other, or I could special case this specific example   (for the REXX programming entry)   into just simply combining those two programming entries into one,   much like the way it currently handles different spellings of a small number of computer programming languages that are spelled differently, or use different glyphs the express the small programming language.     -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger\|Gerard Schildberger]] ([[User talk:Gerard Schildberger\|talk]]) 22:57, 10 February 2019 (UTC) This decision would be similar of using   '''PL/I'''   instead of   '''PL/1''';   Each computer programming entry for   '''PL/1'''   was changed "by hand" to   '''PL/I'''.     -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger\|Gerard Schildberger]] ([[User talk:Gerard Schildberger\|talk]]) 23:29, 10 February 2019 (UTC) I prefer the global script change method   (or by hand),   as this will help consolidate the computer programming language name and would have less confusion to those that think that the two programming languages are distinct entities.     -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger\|Gerard Schildberger]] ([[User talk:Gerard Schildberger\|talk]]) 23:03, 10 February 2019 (UTC) I just noticed that some Rosetta Code tasks that have   '''Mathematica'''   also have (in conjunction)   '''Wolfram Language'''   <br>(in the same   <big> <nowiki> =={{header\|Mathematica / Wolfram Language}}== </nowiki> </big>   header). In that case, each specified language would have it's '''members''' count to be included, so that it appears that in this case, it can appear as double-counting   (in a global total sense).     -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger\|Gerard Schildberger]] ([[User talk:Gerard Schildberger\|talk]]) 23:59, 10 February 2019 (UTC) Also, as a by-product of having two computer programming languages specified in the <br>  <big> <nowiki> =={{header\|Mathematica / Wolfram Language}}== </nowiki> </big>   header,   it would appear like there was an entry for each of the two languages specified, thus my comment about double counting.     -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger\|Gerard Schildberger]] ([[User talk:Gerard Schildberger\|talk]]) 00:04, 11 February 2019 (UTC) :See my musing on this subject (from last September) here: [http://rosettacode.org/wiki/Rosetta_Code:Village_Pump/Whoa!_10000_examples!#Lies.2C_damned_lies_and_statistics Lies, damned lies, and statistics] --[[User:Thundergnat\|Thundergnat]] ([[User talk:Thundergnat\|talk]]) 00:23, 11 February 2019 (UTC) == Category vs. solution == In the latest version of the page you added the line: <blockquote>Only computer programming languages that have at least one programming solution are listed.</blockquote> but that is not the case. If it is, please point out a link to '''any''' programming solution for '''any''' of the following: [[Script Basic]] [[.QL]] [[8 1/2]] [[A+]] [[Agda2]] [[ALGOL]] [[Alice ML]] [[ANT]] [[Application Master]] [[ASP]] [[ASP.Net]] [[AspectC++]] [[Axum]] [[B]] [[Beta]] [[C0H]] [[Caml]] [[CB80]] [[Cecil]] [[Cilk]] [[Cilk++]] [[Datalog]] [[Diesel]] [[Elan]] [[Euler]] [[FAUST]] [[FeatureC++]] [[FPI]] [[FreeMat]] [[Goo]] [[Jabaco]] [[KeyList Databasing]] [[L.in.oleum]] [[Lotus 123 Macro Scripting]] [[Lout]] [[M680x0]] [[ME10 macro]] [[MGS]] [[Mirelle]] [[Mython]] [[Nice]] [[NQP]] [[OpenC++]] [[Pentium Assembly]] [[PLUS]] [[PLZ/SYS]] [[PPC Assembly]] [[PPL]] [[QuakeC]] [[Refal]] [[RLSL]] [[RTSL]] [[Script3D]] [[Superbase BASIC]] [[TAL]] [[TeLa]] [[Thistle]] [[UScript]] [[UserRPL]] [[VRML]] [[WML]] [[Xbase]] [[CHR]] [[MAPPER]] RC POP.OUT is a count of ''categories'' '''not''' ''programming solutions''. BTW, there are 639 languages with at least one solution on the site. --[[User:Thundergnat\|Thundergnat]] ([[User talk:Thundergnat\|talk]]) 00:16, 6 May 2019 (UTC) : Sorry for the misquote.   I should've mentioned ''members'', not programming solutions.     -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger\|Gerard Schildberger]] ([[User talk:Gerard Schildberger\|talk]]) 05:04, 6 May 2019 (UTC)