Anonymous user
Category talk:Go: Difference between revisions
→In general, non-solutions: "... so long as there is an explanation of the caveats"
(→In general, non-solutions: "... so long as there is an explanation of the caveats") |
|||
Line 22:
: In general, I'd rather see a best-effort work-alike solution for language A to task B, than no solution for language A, so long as there is an explanation of the caveats. Personally, I find that helps me understand language A's peculiarities better, and I expect the same would be true for others. --[[User:Short Circuit|Michael Mol]] 02:43, 30 April 2011 (UTC)
::Michael, thank you so much for your perspective! People, he speaks from experience. Click the link and read his profile if you don't know who he is.... —[[User:Sonia|Sonia]] 03:55, 30 April 2011 (UTC)
:: Michael said "... so long as there is an explanation of the caveats". That's where I think people may fail. If a solution is only a partial solution, or othewrwise stretches the task definition, then if the language implementor still thinks their code has merits then they should start with an up front, unambiguous statement of where they think their solution deviates - as a courtesy to the task writer and the other solutions; then follow up with why their solution should nevertheless be present. That would warn people who are comparing different implementations. --[[User:Paddy3118|Paddy3118]] 12:00, 30 April 2011 (UTC)
===Add a variable to a class instance at runtime===
| |||