Anonymous user
Talk:Box the compass: Difference between revisions
m
→Renaming of a programming language: elided the use of «code» to use highlighting.
(→Why C needs fixing: Explanation of terms) |
m (→Renaming of a programming language: elided the use of «code» to use highlighting.) |
||
| (5 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown) | |||
Line 82:
::::::: I disregarded 4 because with it there would be no clear interpretation for the task (what does "instead use these values" even mean? Redefine what "North" is?), that's not my wrongdoing. Like I said, before worrying about what the column is, why don't you clarify what the ''table'' is, and why are we given a list of 33 strange numbers? Also, if the meaning is "not given", on what basis can you claim the values are incorrect to begin with? --[[User:Ledrug|Ledrug]] 20:30, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
::::::::"The table" is a list of 32 ranges of degrees ("arcs"?) on a compass (for some reason they chose to split "North" into two rows with the same number) and their names. The "number" column (also called "index" in other parts of this discussion) corresponds to the numbers on the compass picture on that article ("1" being "North"). The "strange numbers" are test values we can use to make sure that the algorithm properly maps values to the given named ranges. Since there is no range #33 on the compass (which should probably be mentioned or maybe even duplicated in the task), no given value can correspond to #33. The last value falls within range #1, "North". --[[User:Mwn3d|Mwn3d]] 20:39, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
::::::::: In that case perhaps the index should be tied to the result rather than being taken mod 32. [[User:CRGreathouse|CRGreathouse]] 21:43, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
::: Yes, it's a pretty silly task in that respect. I found it easier to change the code than to argue for the obvious numbering. [[User:CRGreathouse|CRGreathouse]] 19:01, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
:::: It indeed takes a few keystrokes to make the output compliant--but compliant to ''what''? In any event, I'm done arguing, I've said more than enough already. --[[User:Ledrug|Ledrug]] 20:30, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
===Direction, index, and angle===
When comparing angles and directions as the wp table does, then you have to deal with the issue of ranges. Angles can go beyond representing one turn - directions are merely headings: turn 720 degrees and you end up at the same heading. If the names of the points of the compass in order are enumerated from 1 you end up with an index that has no 33. It makes sense to index the compass points in such a way as they are difficult to remember - hence their recollection in order being a test. Having thirty three and one as indices would be implying that North and North are different headings/bearings/directions which is an absurdity.
In creating the wp table, the author chose to show a mapping between ranges of angles and compass points that goes (just) beyond one turn of angle. They show a second occurrence of North. They show a second occurrence of Norths index too which is 1.
If the tables index were of ranges of angle rather than compass point then we would indeed have a different range and so a different index would be appropriate, ''but that is not the case''.
I must admit that I did not have this argument in full to handuntil now. I must also say though that I did note that the index wrapped and that it seemed right and proper to do so. (Wrapping angles so they end up in 0-360 degree range is commonplace for me, almost like a "normallization for angles", so seeing an index wrap when the direction wrapped rang no bells in my case). --[[User:Paddy3118|Paddy3118]] 04:57, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
==Renaming of a programming language==
I hope I didn't break the rules. The (old) entry under '''REXX''' was instead, '''ooRexx'''.
This would be similar to someone entering a '''C++''' entry under '''C'''.
If this isn't acceptable, I would like the know what the procedure is, and should the original poster be told of this?
I didn't like to move an entire (big) programming entry like that, too many things could've gone wrong with my fat fingers and not-so-good eyesight. -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger|Gerard Schildberger]] 18:21, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
| |||