Rosetta Code

User talk:Paddy3118: Difference between revisions

User page Discussion

User talk:Paddy3118 (view source)

Revision as of 02:51, 9 December 2020

6,288 bytes added ,  3 years ago
→‎super_d numbers Python example: added a new section.
(→‎super_d numbers Python example: added a new section.)
Line 1,830:
 
:Yep, you're right. Corrected now, Thanks 👍--[[User:Paddy3118|Paddy3118]] ([[User talk:Paddy3118|talk]]) 15:33, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
 
 
== some general comments of too-quick task deletions and more ==
 
I do believe that the deletion of tasks should be discussed first. &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; <big>But ... </big>
 
I have had a discussion &nbsp;(not fruitful nor pleasant)&nbsp; about the uniqueness of recently entered (draft) tasks and their value &nbsp;(on being on Rosetta Code)&nbsp; and it did not go well for the lone Indian. &nbsp; When challenged, &nbsp; the discourse just got inflammatory, along with strawman arguments, and silly &nbsp;('''So?''')&nbsp; rebuttals, &nbsp; and the stating of opinions as facts, &nbsp; and the use of capitalized use of supposedly shouting &nbsp; &nbsp; <big> '''is completely besides the point''',</big> &nbsp; &nbsp; whenever I try to make a point which is either disagreed upon or dismissed, &nbsp; and so on and so on and ... &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; Rosetta Code (discussions/talks) has become a pretty unfriendly place, and in my opinion, toxic. &nbsp; Yeah, I know, I know, a strong word. &nbsp; Whenever challenged, &nbsp; the challenger just doubled-down, &nbsp; and went downhill from there. &nbsp; I had entered a solution to the draft task &nbsp; ''Similar words'', &nbsp; and it was summarily deleted, &nbsp; along with the (draft) task. &nbsp; I think that that (draft) task definitely had a uniqueness to it and wasn't just another version of finding an &nbsp; '''xxx''' &nbsp; string in a list of words in a dictionary. &nbsp; Far from it. &nbsp; As a matter of fact, &nbsp; the other deleted tasks also had their merits, &nbsp; but there is no sense in me trying to defend those merits, &nbsp; as defending something (lately) just means the defender gets rebuffed with a lot of sarcasm and acidic rhetoric ... and worse. &nbsp; If one can't have a polite discourse on the merits of a task without all that vitriol and ad-holmium attacks, &nbsp; then why bother having "talk" discussions? &nbsp; Something has to be done &nbsp; (or should be done). &nbsp; Not to mention that someone needs to define what "spam" is so that term is used correctly. &nbsp; Not to mention janitorial services. &nbsp; A janitor doesn't throw the furniture out, &nbsp; just the dust and junk on the floor. &nbsp; I think the use of words like "dump" &nbsp; (does it really matter if someone adds draft tasks at a certain speed?) &nbsp; is so condescending and judgemental. &nbsp; ... And the use of words like &nbsp; "vomiting", &nbsp; "low quality", &nbsp; and numerous other words/phrases of that ilk. &nbsp; And the statement of opinions as fact ... hard to argue with a closed mind (or gawd-like). &nbsp; These are some of the reasons (regarding wording and phrasing and "it's true 'cause I say it's true ...) &nbsp; that I call toxic to opening a discussion. &nbsp; It may appear to anyone that the wording is toxic, &nbsp; but it doesn't sink home unless YOU get defamed, then it's a story of a different color). &nbsp; I fear that this sort of rhetoric will quell (or discourage) others from joining it or offering/opening a new discussion. &nbsp; Why have to suffer the slings and arrows from offering one's opinion on a Rosetta Code discussion? &nbsp; I wish I could go on and write about some of the (draft) tasks that were deleted. &nbsp; Each task had &nbsp; (bless their departed souls) &nbsp; their merits and different ways/methods of solving them &nbsp; (not to mention their solutions), &nbsp; and it wasn't just variants of find &nbsp; '''xyz''' &nbsp; words in a dictionary. &nbsp; Some were &nbsp; ''like'' &nbsp; anagrams, &nbsp; others needed a somewhat different method(s). &nbsp; Every chef, er, ... &nbsp; programmer can bring a new recipe for solutions here at (old) Rosetta Code. &nbsp; For what I've observed, &nbsp; the discussion of deletion of tasks is like asking five wolves and a sheep on what's going to be for supper? &nbsp; (<strike>Deleting</strike> Voting on tasks isn't a democracy. &nbsp; Ya can't <strike>execute</strike> delete someone by counting votes. &nbsp; There &nbsp; ''should be'' &nbsp; a discussion/debate). &nbsp; There are always people who think word searches are all alike. &nbsp; Well, they ain't. &nbsp; &nbsp; Anyone who thinks otherwise should be banned for a week or more. &nbsp; Boy oh boy!! &nbsp; That'll teach 'em from trying to to participate in the culture at Rosetta Code!! &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; --- By the way, I wish &nbsp;<u>any</u>&nbsp; other dictionary would be used that mimics a true dictionary: &nbsp; duplicate words, capitalization (God and god), word phrases, hyphenated words, etc.). &nbsp; Someone actually said, the &nbsp; '''xxx''' &nbsp; word isn't in the &nbsp; unixdict.txt &nbsp; (or whatever it's called) &nbsp; file, &nbsp; so it isn't a word (!!!). &nbsp; &nbsp; OMG! &nbsp; &nbsp; Having ALL words in lowercase defeats the purpose of a dictionary. &nbsp; Searches should be caseless, &nbsp; unless specifically requested that they be not. &nbsp; At this point, &nbsp; I might as well rant a bit &nbsp; (with my tongue <u>firmly</u> and humorously in cheek). &nbsp; &nbsp; Why have all those (vomited?) types of sorts? &nbsp; You've seen one type of sort if you've seen 'em all. &nbsp; Does Rosetta Code really need all those types/categories of sorts? &nbsp; My oh my, &nbsp; the sorts! &nbsp; The sorts!. &nbsp; All those sorts!! &nbsp; &nbsp; And all those kinds of primes. &nbsp; Yikes! &nbsp; And all those types of sequences. &nbsp; To borrow a phrase: &nbsp; '''Sheesh!!''' &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; (Use of the that exclamation should prove my point beyond all possibility of any and all rebuttals &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; ... &nbsp; 'cause I said so). &nbsp; &nbsp; And all those types of trivial &nbsp; '''DO/FOR''' &nbsp; loops. &nbsp; I wonder what Dr. N. J. A. Sloane thinks or all those thousand and thousands and thousands of integer sequences in OEIS. &nbsp; Oy veh!! &nbsp; &nbsp; The mind boggles on what a janitor with unlimited power (or ego) could do. &nbsp; &nbsp; End of silly rant. &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; Well, at least I feel better. &nbsp; None of the above needs responding, &nbsp; that way I can actually think I made a point or two. &nbsp; &nbsp; -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger|Gerard Schildberger]] ([[User talk:Gerard Schildberger|talk]]) 02:51, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://rosettacode.org/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/81100"