Talk:Case-sensitivity of identifiers: Difference between revisions

← Older edit

Talk:Case-sensitivity of identifiers (view source)

Revision as of 20:45, 17 April 2016

1,541 bytes added , 8 years ago

→‎task clarification

Rdm

6,951

edits

Revision as of 15:53, 26 April 2011 (view source) rosettacode>Markhobley (We could add a category for case sensitivity) ← Older edit		Latest revision as of 20:45, 17 April 2016 (view source) Rdm (talk \| contribs) (→‎task clarification)
(3 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown)
Line 1: == task name == * The task description needs to state what is needed to complete the task. * Maybe a more descriptive title? Something like "'''Variable case sensitivity'''"? Line 13 ⟶ 15: We could add a category for case sensitivity and place the task in that category. [[User:Markhobley\|Markhobley]] 15:53, 26 April 2011 (UTC) == task clarification == I changed the example outputs in the Rosetta Code task to use pre-formatted output instead of just plain sentences   (so that it would be plainly obvious what is expected as far as output). However, in doing so, I observed that the period at the end of the sentence may just   ''be a period at the end of the sentence''   (the old sentence, that is),   instead of a period at the end of what's expected for the output.   It appears that over half of the programming examples don't have the trailing period. As it was previously, the presence of the period was open to interpretation:   was it a period of the sentence showing the output, or was it a period at the end of what's expected? If the author (or a consensus) think that the trailing period shouldn't be there, it could be removed from the example output (in the task's preamble), as that would make the computer programs less "busy" displaying the period at the end of the output.   Computer programming is chuck full of nits.   -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger\|Gerard Schildberger]] ([[User talk:Gerard Schildberger\|talk]]) 17:08, 17 April 2016 (UTC) ----- One thing that would be nice is to have an explicit task requirement   (rather than   ''we should'' ...).   -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger\|Gerard Schildberger]] ([[User talk:Gerard Schildberger\|talk]]) 17:08, 17 April 2016 (UTC) :Sure, why not... --[[User:Rdm\|Rdm]] ([[User talk:Rdm\|talk]]) 20:45, 17 April 2016 (UTC)