Am Mittwoch, 7. September 2016 18:20:28 UTC+2 schrieb Isaac Gouy: > > > > On Wednesday, September 7, 2016 at 8:15:09 AM UTC-7, > sascha.l....@googlemail.com wrote: > >> >> If this does not count the Benchmark game follows a skewed defintion of a >> library. >> > > > I'm sorry that you don't seem to understand what is expected. >
I do. But you still miss the point that 3rd party libs are just software written by someone. If I follow your logic if some else (not me) posts my solution (what is possible ... its free software) using my library it will be accepted. Lets do this. Taking this benchmark would only be possible if the 3rd party exists. So you would have forbidden Ken and Dennis to create a benchmark entry for C in the early days? Because there were no such libs. Theoretically speaking .. but I hope you get the point. > >> Can you eleborate please, what a library is? >> > > Examples were given in the description: > > http://attractivechaos.github.io/klib/#About > > http://concurrencykit.org/index.html > But this are just two third party libraries, like mine. So where is the difference? They may be larger, okay. But there is nothing in the rules which says that they have to be complex and at least a few years old and so on and so on. If you want to enforce this the description text has to be adjusted. And no it's not about cheating, it's about software making. I think an important fact of the Go ecosystem is the usage of small fitting libraries. BTW: The godoc of my library can be found here: https://godoc.org/bitbucket.org/s_l_teichmann/fastmap -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-nuts" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to golang-nuts+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
