Talk:24 game: Difference between revisions
Content added Content deleted
Underscore (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
(→Purpose: Pong = easy) |
||
Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
:(I don't like to write a task until I have a solution and so can better gauge its suitability, and so write a better task description). --[[User:Paddy3118|Paddy3118]] 20:57, 31 October 2009 (UTC) |
:(I don't like to write a task until I have a solution and so can better gauge its suitability, and so write a better task description). --[[User:Paddy3118|Paddy3118]] 20:57, 31 October 2009 (UTC) |
||
::Without any official guidelines as to what's an appropriate Rosetta task and what isn't, I suppose it's all completely subjective, so I can't very well argue with you. Adding more games isn't such a bad idea; [[RCRPG]] is interesting from an implementation point of view but sorely lacking in the fun department. I wonder how hard it is to write a minimal Pong clone. —[[User:Underscore|Underscore]] 22:24, 31 October 2009 (UTC) |
::Without any official guidelines as to what's an appropriate Rosetta task and what isn't, I suppose it's all completely subjective, so I can't very well argue with you. Adding more games isn't such a bad idea; [[RCRPG]] is interesting from an implementation point of view but sorely lacking in the fun department. I wonder how hard it is to write a minimal Pong clone. —[[User:Underscore|Underscore]] 22:24, 31 October 2009 (UTC) |
||
:::''Very'' easy, with modern hardware and programming languages. |
|||
:::FWIW, this task does strike me as being a somewhat useful one. I used to have a similar <s>time waster</s> game when I was a teen where you got 4 numbers and a goal, the end. (Except for the variable goal, identical to this task.) -- [[User:Eriksiers|Eriksiers]] 02:23, 1 November 2009 (UTC) |
Revision as of 02:23, 1 November 2009
Purpose
What's the theoretical or practical interest in this task? I'd be interested in a program that enumerated all the 4-tuples that have solutions or determined whether a given 4-tuple had a solution, but we've already got tasks for getting input from the user, parsing arithmetic expressions, and so on. —Underscore 19:22, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
- Umm,
- Playing the game.
- We have a gazillion sorts for example, (some are very impractical); so we can stand some repetition.
- We don't have many games, (of any description). Some site grazers might be attracted just by the word 'game'.
- The input checking is novel.
- The task is more than the some of its parts! (We have tasks covering most statement types, and it would not make sense to use that as a reason for not doing any composite task).
- Prelude to possibly another task to solve the game.
- (I don't like to write a task until I have a solution and so can better gauge its suitability, and so write a better task description). --Paddy3118 20:57, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
- Without any official guidelines as to what's an appropriate Rosetta task and what isn't, I suppose it's all completely subjective, so I can't very well argue with you. Adding more games isn't such a bad idea; RCRPG is interesting from an implementation point of view but sorely lacking in the fun department. I wonder how hard it is to write a minimal Pong clone. —Underscore 22:24, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
- Very easy, with modern hardware and programming languages.
- FWIW, this task does strike me as being a somewhat useful one. I used to have a similar
time wastergame when I was a teen where you got 4 numbers and a goal, the end. (Except for the variable goal, identical to this task.) -- Eriksiers 02:23, 1 November 2009 (UTC)
- Without any official guidelines as to what's an appropriate Rosetta task and what isn't, I suppose it's all completely subjective, so I can't very well argue with you. Adding more games isn't such a bad idea; RCRPG is interesting from an implementation point of view but sorely lacking in the fun department. I wonder how hard it is to write a minimal Pong clone. —Underscore 22:24, 31 October 2009 (UTC)