Anonymous user
User talk:Morn: Difference between revisions
no edit summary
(Remote agent, graphic demos, etc) |
No edit summary |
||
Line 13:
:::::I think the site could use a few more games or simple graphics demos as tasks, because too many of the current tasks are heavily geared towards language features such as recursion, complex data structures and such. Of course it's impressive when all you have to do is import the appropriate module in Python to solve a task in [[N-queens_problem#Python|about 3 lines of code]], but then it's not really comparing languages but standard libraries. Not that doing the latter is wrong; I absolutely love Python for its extensive standard library, but I'd like to see more tasks that are more equally within reach of powerful present-day and older languages. --[[User:Morn|Morn]] 11:34, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
::::::[[Remote Agent]] is another game-type task that's incubating at the moment. As for graphic demos--I wholly agree. I'll note, though, that examples aren't limited to using the "standard library"; third-party and commercial libraries are also perfectly acceptable. (It's an unrealized goal of mine for RC to touch on comparing solving problems with different libraries, as it does with different languages.) --[[User:Short Circuit|Michael Mol]] 14:42, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
:::::::Graphics demos would also show that particularly those languages that are very powerful for implementing algorithms such as CL or Python are relatively inconvenient for e.g. drawing things on screen or producing sound, because you need additional libraries for that. If people ask me I like to recommend Python as the perfect language for beginners (and as opposed to 1980s BASIC, you are less likely to outgrow it completely), but some things like graphics output have not become easier in newer languages at all. JavaScript with the canvas element or perhaps Processing.js really fill a niche there.
:::::::As for the library intercomparison, I agree that's interesting, but then you will probably not only want to show ''how'' it's done, but also benchmark it, e.g. regular Python vs Psyco vs NumPy execution speed. And you might have to rethink the layout, because putting all solutions for a given problem on a single page might lead to overlong pages then.
:::::::I'm wondering if there should be a better way for source code comments. I don't mean putting // or REM or # in the source code, but a template solution that e.g. displays a red dot in front of a line and when you hover over it with the mouse pointer, it shows the comment. Right now explanations are relegated to Talk pages and that seems like an inconvenient solution. --[[User:Morn|Morn]] 15:10, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
| |||