Anonymous user
Talk:Words containing "the" substring: Difference between revisions
Talk:Words containing "the" substring (view source)
Revision as of 16:24, 9 December 2020
, 3 years ago→"(on this page)"?
Thundergnat (talk | contribs) (→Trivial task: I'm sure "incivility" will be bandied about soon) |
|||
| (9 intermediate revisions by 5 users not shown) | |||
Line 8:
:: Those are '''all''' incidental and peripheral to the task. It also doesn't specify to power your computer on first. I suppose I should look forward to the task "Turn on your computer then find words containing "the" substring" because "Thatss completetly diffent!!1!1" Sheesh. --[[User:Thundergnat|Thundergnat]] ([[User talk:Thundergnat|talk]]) 17:48, 6 December 2020 (UTC)
:::I agree. Finding a substring of a string is just problem 2 of [[String matching]], and reading in a dictionary first is a trivial addition- especially since so many of the recent tasks involve reading in the same dictionary. [[User:Thebigh|Thebigh]] ([[User talk:Thebigh|talk]]) 18:20, 6 December 2020 (UTC)
Line 18:
::::: That brings us back to the actual task requirements, essentially, filter a list based on some substring thereof; much like [[String matching]] or [[ABC words]], two tasks among many that quite admirably cover this concept quite well. The point this whole thread started with was "Please lets cut down on the largely redundant tasks". Using examples of irrelevant implementation details and what the programmer <quote>decides to implement</quote> as argument for why it is not, is disingenuous at best. --[[User:Thundergnat|Thundergnat]] ([[User talk:Thundergnat|talk]]) 20:14, 6 December 2020 (UTC)
::::::: I know what a strawman argument is. It was your last statement (''Where is there '''ANY''' mention ...''). In any case, saying "'''So?'''" after a statement isn't a refutation. Some people think I disagree about the triviality of some of the task's requirements. I don't think they aren't trivial (yeah, I know, double negative). I was attempting to explain the differences as I see them (however trivial they appear) and in doing so, doesn't make my thoughts/writings on these matters disingenuous. Calling them that isn't a productive way to have a discussion when you start categorizing/defaming people's opinions that don't agree with yours. -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger|Gerard Schildberger]] ([[User talk:Gerard Schildberger|talk]]) 20:41, 6 December 2020 (UTC)
:::::::: <quote>So? after a statement isn't a refutation</quote> Quite right, the refutation would have been the sentence: <quote>The dictionary to use was specified. Which makes all of that completely besides the point.</quote> just following that.
:::::::: Ok, so why is "filter a list based on some substring" is not already adequately covered by [[String matching]] or [[ABC words]] among others? We've already established that all of the specifics of dictionary loading and handling are ''not'' requirements, nor is the specific layout, order, counting or tracking of the output. The "trivial" part of the remaining requirements is the filtering, and it isn't that the filtering is trivial, it that there are already many existing tasks for which this is a trivial variation; which was why this whole thread started. --[[User:Thundergnat|Thundergnat]] ([[User talk:Thundergnat|talk]]) 21:12, 6 December 2020 (UTC)
:::::::: I never used it as a justification, it was just a comment. Just saying that it's completely besides the point doesn't make it so. Saying it in all caps doesn't make it true. -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger|Gerard Schildberger]] ([[User talk:Gerard Schildberger|talk]]) 20:46, 6 December 2020 (UTC)
::::::::: True, I agree. Saying it is besides the point ''doesn't'' make it so. It is the ''fact'' that it is besides the point that makes it so. <quote>Saying it in all caps doesn't make it true.</quote> Also true. It is just a method of emphasising a point that I think was worth emphasising since you ''seem'' to be missing it. Cheers! --[[User:Thundergnat|Thundergnat]] ([[User talk:Thundergnat|talk]]) 21:12, 6 December 2020 (UTC)
::: If I may insert my 2 cents... although Gerard is possibly overstating the case, the use of the dictionary does make it a little different as we have to look at actual words in a language (English in the unixdict case). Questions like "which words in the language contain "the" as a substring" are (perhaps not enormously) interesting questions that are IMHO different to "show how to check a string contains a substring".
::: I see Thundergnat has (rightly IMHO) deleted the "find words that contain all the vowels" task as it is little different from this and the "find the words that contain "a", "b" and "c" in order" task etc. (Actually, I think the "find the words that contain all the vowels" is actually a marginally more interesting task than the ABC one but the ABC one came first...). --[[User:Tigerofdarkness|Tigerofdarkness]] ([[User talk:Tigerofdarkness|talk]]) 20:09, 6 December 2020 (UTC)
===Some Comparisons===
We can directly compare answers to the ''tasks'' said to be similar. Would a curious programmer not versed in these particular languages , having read a languages example in the string matching task, gain much from the languages extra code in this new task?
* [[Words containing "the" substring#FreeBASIC]], [[String matching#FreeBasic]].
* [[Words containing "the" substring#REXX]], [[String matching#REXX]].
* [[Words containing "the" substring#Raku]], [[String matching#Raku]].
* [[Words containing "the" substring#AWK]], [[String matching#AWK]].
<br>
--[[User:Paddy3118|Paddy3118]] ([[User talk:Paddy3118|talk]]) 00:23, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
=== "(on this page)"? ===
I think I overlooked that little part; am I right in interpreting this as that very RosettaPage's contents? I've changed my code snippet, but do not see it in other solutions, and now I am a bit confused.
Sorry, me stupid; if so I can revert to the old. [[User:Cg|Cg]] ([[User talk:Cg|talk]]) 14:52, 9 December 2020 (CET)
:Unlikely, it probably just meant "show output here", and in any case any pertinent words in unixdict.txt are ''all'' by now repeated multiple times on this page, which would make any such filtering utterly pointless. --[[User:Petelomax|Pete Lomax]] ([[User talk:Petelomax|talk]]) 16:16, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
::Yup, you're right. Counting might have made a little sense, but these numbers would also change... Thanks. [[User:Cg|Cg]] ([[User talk:Cg|talk]]) 17:24, 9 December 2020 (CET)
| |||