Re: [WOT] Google Programming Contest.

2002-02-12 Thread Vivek Khera
> "ABH" == Ask Bjoern Hansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: ABH> The myth lives on. :-) It's not quite true. It was at UCLA and ABH> the story was different: ABH> http://nntp.perl.org/group/perl.advocacy;max=961 ABH> http://nntp.perl.org/group/perl.advocacy/956 Quite lame to make a programmi

Re: [WOT] Google Programming Contest.

2002-02-08 Thread Ask Bjoern Hansen
On Thu, 7 Feb 2002, Medi Montaseri wrote: > This reaminds me of a Brain Bowl competition at USC a few years > ago, where the winner (a one man Perl speaking team) solved 4 out > of 6 problems in the given time (compared to other multiple member > teams) and the school of engineering decided to re

Re: [WOT] Google Programming Contest.

2002-02-07 Thread kkeller-modperl
Bill Moseley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Sorry for the Way Off Topic, and sorry if I missed this on the > list already: http://www.google.com/programming-contest/ It seems like a lame way to hire a contractor. :) And an even lamer way to get hired as a contractor. (ps to randal--dammit, ne

Re: [WOT] Google Programming Contest.

2002-02-07 Thread Medi Montaseri
This reaminds me of a Brain Bowl competition at USC a few years ago, where the winner (a one man Perl speaking team) solved 4 out of 6 problems in the given time (compared to other multiple member teams) and the school of engineering decided to remove Perl as one of the possible languages The sto

Re: [WOT] Google Programming Contest.

2002-02-07 Thread iain truskett
* Randal L. Schwartz ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [08 Feb 2002 05:28]: > * "Dave" == Dave Rolsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > In the Slashdot discussion, there's a link to a usenet posting by a > > Google employee which explicitly says only C++ or Java, no Perl or > > Lisp. > "A google employee" is per

Re: [WOT] Google Programming Contest.

2002-02-07 Thread Randal L. Schwartz
> "Dave" == Dave Rolsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Dave> In the Slashdot discussion, there's a link to a usenet posting by a Google Dave> employee which explicitly says only C++ or Java, no Perl or Lisp. "A google employee" is perhaps only an opinion though. Is it the group running the con

Re: [WOT] Google Programming Contest.

2002-02-07 Thread Dave Rolsky
On 7 Feb 2002, Randal L. Schwartz wrote: > No, they say "must use our C++ interface routines", and "no closed-source > solutions". If you provide an open source package, you must > tell where and how to download and build. > > Thus, Perl is fine. In the Slashdot discussion, there's a link to a

Re: [WOT] Google Programming Contest.

2002-02-07 Thread Randal L. Schwartz
> "Bill" == Bill Moseley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Bill> Sorry for the Way Off Topic, and sorry if I missed this on the list already: Bill> http://www.google.com/programming-contest/ Bill> They say C++ or Java. What, no Perl? No, they say "must use our C++ interface routines", and "no cl

[WOT] Google Programming Contest.

2002-02-07 Thread Bill Moseley
Sorry for the Way Off Topic, and sorry if I missed this on the list already: http://www.google.com/programming-contest/ They say C++ or Java. What, no Perl? -- Bill Moseley mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]