Talk:RC POP.OUT: Difference between revisions
Content added Content deleted
m (→language popularity: clarified what is being shown in the output. -- ~~~~) |
|||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
Languages with no entry (no solutions) are not listed. -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger|Gerard Schildberger]] ([[User talk:Gerard Schildberger|talk]]) 02:01, 5 December 2013 (UTC) |
Languages with no entry (no solutions) are not listed. -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger|Gerard Schildberger]] ([[User talk:Gerard Schildberger|talk]]) 02:01, 5 December 2013 (UTC) |
||
:[[User:Gerard Schildberger|Gerard Schildberger]], would it make sense to include the zero-solution languages? That way we can compare with solutions from other languages and compare where the differences are. For example my current Awk solution is only giving 484 languages with > 0 solutions, but 574 total (the difference being the 0 solution languages). I'd like to see what your zero-solution languages are to help debug the problem. -- [[User:3havj7t3nps8z8wij3g9|3havj7t3nps8z8wij3g9]] ([[User talk:3havj7t3nps8z8wij3g9|talk]]) 19:25, 27 May 2015 (UTC) |
|||
Revision as of 19:25, 27 May 2015
language popularity
The REXX (program) that generates the output only lists those languages that have an entry.
Languages with no entry (no solutions) are not listed. -- Gerard Schildberger (talk) 02:01, 5 December 2013 (UTC)
- Gerard Schildberger, would it make sense to include the zero-solution languages? That way we can compare with solutions from other languages and compare where the differences are. For example my current Awk solution is only giving 484 languages with > 0 solutions, but 574 total (the difference being the 0 solution languages). I'd like to see what your zero-solution languages are to help debug the problem. -- 3havj7t3nps8z8wij3g9 (talk) 19:25, 27 May 2015 (UTC)