Talk:Binary digits: Difference between revisions
→Has to be a dupe
(Do not rename this task) |
|||
Line 29:
:::::If that's the intent then it needs to be specified better and possibly moved so that the intention is better conveyed (I'm thinking [[Non-decimal radices/Convert/Binary]]). Since [[Non-decimal radices/Output]] doesn't offer much in the way of customization (since the task is to let the language do it), its binary examples would be directly copied to this task. So I think we should disallow those sorts of built-in functions. --[[User:Mwn3d|Mwn3d]] 14:45, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
::::::Possibly we could drop convert, and have Non-decimal radices/Binary, because this task does not necessary involve conversion, but I think the name does not need changing here. The task is appropriately categorized. I suggest that we do not rename. [[User:Markhobley|Markhobley]] 15:56, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
:::::::For what it's worth: the J implementation of this task is all about conversion, and not at all about output (since implicit output was sufficient). Furthermore, in the general context of computer engineering, "binary output" typically means something very different from what this task asks for (and is typically machine specific and not general to all the platforms supported by a language unless the language itself only has implementations for one machine architecture). I do not have any specific suggestions to resolve these issues, but I do not think that these issues should be disregarded when considering other suggestions. --[[User:Rdm|Rdm]] 16:50, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
| |||