User talk:Chunes: Difference between revisions

From Rosetta Code
Content added Content deleted
Line 6: Line 6:
:<lang plainenglish>A factorial is a number.
:<lang plainenglish>A factorial is a number.


To find a factorial of a number:
To compute a factorial of a number:
...
...


\Calling the routine
\Calling the routine
Find a factorial of 5.
Compute a factorial of 5.
Write "" then the factorial on the console.</lang>
Write "" then the factorial on the console.</lang>
:Declaring type aliases to make routines sound more natural is commonplace in the noodle, so I think it's idiomatic.
:Declaring type aliases to make routines sound more natural is commonplace in the noodle, so I think it's idiomatic. The downside here is the indefinite article <code>a</code> sounds a bit off. You could also use <code>some</code>, but it still sounds strange, like there could be more than one result.


:The second is
:The second is
Line 21: Line 21:
Compute the factorial of 5 giving a number.
Compute the factorial of 5 giving a number.
Write "" then the number on the console.</lang>
Write "" then the number on the console.</lang>
:I've seen this "giving" phrasing in the noodle as well, and I think it's a fairly elegant solution as well. --[[User:Chunes|Chunes]] ([[User talk:Chunes|talk]]) 15:48, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
:I've seen this "giving" phrasing in the noodle as well, and I think it's a fairly elegant solution. --[[User:Chunes|Chunes]] ([[User talk:Chunes|talk]]) 15:48, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

Revision as of 15:57, 25 September 2020

"Code review" for Plain English

Hello Chunes, would you please take a look at my implementation of factorial? I'm not quite happy with it, and I hope could suggest some improvements. For example, I don't like the phrase To put a number's factorial into another number, but don't know how else to make it work. Same with Put the number's factorial into the number, which seems quite an unnatural thing to say in plain English. I would like to keep the recursive approach however, just make it more "idiomatic" if there's such thing as idiomatic Plain English. Thanks for help! --Dick de Bill (talk) 14:48, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

I've been struggling a bit myself with naming routines. I think I would go one of two ways with this. The first is
<lang plainenglish>A factorial is a number.

To compute a factorial of a number: ...

\Calling the routine Compute a factorial of 5. Write "" then the factorial on the console.</lang>

Declaring type aliases to make routines sound more natural is commonplace in the noodle, so I think it's idiomatic. The downside here is the indefinite article a sounds a bit off. You could also use some, but it still sounds strange, like there could be more than one result.
The second is
<lang plainenglish>To compute the factorial of a number giving another number:

...

\Calling the routine Compute the factorial of 5 giving a number. Write "" then the number on the console.</lang>

I've seen this "giving" phrasing in the noodle as well, and I think it's a fairly elegant solution. --Chunes (talk) 15:48, 25 September 2020 (UTC)