Rosetta Code talk:Village Pump/Suggest a programming task: Difference between revisions

Quite often the task descriptions are created with a particular set of languages (or a particular paradigm) in mind, and other languages may not map into it completely. I think it may be better to allow creation of new tasks, but filter/merge them where there is a redundancy to a more generic task at a later time. It is actually nicer to have a larger number of tasks because it allows new contributers a little more flexibility in choosing the tasks (but it becomes harder for languages to become complete). [[User:Rahul|Rahul]] 20:09, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

:I disagree. I don't think that particular languages are thought of when creating tasks. Maybe very general paradigms are thought of (like "object oriented" or "functional"), but mostly the focus is something that people do frequently or can learn a lot from. Merging isn't very easy if a lot of examples sprout up quickly, especially since merging is human enough that a bot can't do it well and--even when called upon--experts on a particular language don't frequently merge old examples and change them for the new task (see: [[String Length]] and [[Loop Structures]] vs [[Iteration]]). Having a large number of tasks is nice in some ways and not nice in others. It's nice because we can have good coverage of programming ideas, but not nice because they can get lost in the solutions category (even with the recent reorganization). I think we should continue to make sure that new tasks are unique, valuable, and possible in many languages. This can be helped by not encouraging a create then review and merge/delete sort of process.--[[User:Mwn3d|Mwn3d]] 20:33, 7 October 2008 (UTC)