User talk:Benji: Difference between revisions
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
==Obscuring example== |
==Obscuring example== |
||
Hi Benji. If an example is wrong then it's good to fix the example. If you have a new way of completing the task than the example given then you might split the entry, adding explanations as well as another entry, but otherwise if there is a prior entry for a task then it is usually left alone. I reverted your edits to [[Range extraction#Python]] for that last reason; (but also because the Python example was written as part of defining the task too). --[[User:Paddy3118|Paddy3118]] ([[User talk:Paddy3118|talk]]) 10:57, 28 December 2013 (UTC) |
Hi Benji. If an example is wrong then it's good to fix the example. If you have a new way of completing the task than the example given then you might split the entry, adding explanations as well as another entry, but otherwise if there is a prior entry for a task then it is usually left alone. I reverted your edits to [[Range extraction#Python]] for that last reason; (but also because the Python example was written as part of defining the task too). --[[User:Paddy3118|Paddy3118]] ([[User talk:Paddy3118|talk]]) 10:57, 28 December 2013 (UTC) |
||
Hi, Paddy. I wouldn't say the example was wrong, but it didn't demonstrate the strengths of Python very well. I'm new here so I may have missed some nuance. --[[User:Benji|Benji]] ([[User talk:Benji|talk]]) 01:41, 21 January 2014 (UTC) |
|||
Latest revision as of 01:41, 21 January 2014
random?
Hi Benji, why the change to the Python random example? Does random.randint always use the OS's random number generator? --Paddy3118 (talk) 09:04, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
Hi Paddy, yep random.randint uses the OS's random number generator. The new version of the code is just simpler and is what people will normally want. --Benji (talk) 01:39, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
Obscuring example
Hi Benji. If an example is wrong then it's good to fix the example. If you have a new way of completing the task than the example given then you might split the entry, adding explanations as well as another entry, but otherwise if there is a prior entry for a task then it is usually left alone. I reverted your edits to Range extraction#Python for that last reason; (but also because the Python example was written as part of defining the task too). --Paddy3118 (talk) 10:57, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
Hi, Paddy. I wouldn't say the example was wrong, but it didn't demonstrate the strengths of Python very well. I'm new here so I may have missed some nuance. --Benji (talk) 01:41, 21 January 2014 (UTC)