Category talk:RCBF
Shouldn't this be a Task and not a Catagory? It's very hard to find this where it is now and it's good content.
- It's a bit more than a task really. Short Circuit was thinking of it as a big project. Wouldn't it be a little odd to have a language interpreter on the same level as the bubble sort? (PS: you can sign your talk posts with --~~~~ and it will fill in the info for you) --Mwn3d 14:46, 11 December 2007 (MST)
- Takes about 10-15 mins to code a brainfuck interpreter.. I don't see it as a large project (because brainfuck is one of the most simple programming languages in existence for one) and don't think it's out of place next to bubble sort but it would make sense to have it in a catagory like "Compilers/Interpreters/Evaluators" or something Epsilon
- RCBF is a category because its implementations use Template:Collection. I wouldn't call it a "big" project, but it's larger than anything we've considered at the same level as a task. In addition, some implementations, like the C++ one, would take up an undesirable amount of space in a multi-language page. Also, originally, RCBF was just a BF implementation written in C++. Mwn3d here added a Java implementation, so I split them into separate pages and created a category (using Template:Colection) for them. --Short Circuit 20:13, 11 December 2007 (MST)
- Takes about 10-15 mins to code a brainfuck interpreter.. I don't see it as a large project (because brainfuck is one of the most simple programming languages in existence for one) and don't think it's out of place next to bubble sort but it would make sense to have it in a catagory like "Compilers/Interpreters/Evaluators" or something Epsilon
- I'm thinking this, RCSNUSP, RCRPG, etc should all be moved to regular pages like virtually all the other tasks, with links to the relevant implementations. This will solve a problem in ImplSearchBot where they show up as unimplemented in all languages. Nothing stops this category from continuing to exist; It's definitely nice for [[Template:Collection}}, but it shouldn't be part of Category:Programming Tasks. --Short Circuit 08:56, 14 March 2009 (UTC)