Tony Bowden wrote:
so even if a neural net (or whatever) did come up
with the above substring heuristic, once it's know then authors can game
the system by artificially crowbarring into their modules' sources, at
which point the heuristic loses value.
I thought the idea was that we /wanted/ people
Andy Lester wrote:
Why is there a scoreboard? Why do we care about rankings? Why is it
necessary to compare one measure to another? What purpose is being
served?
Why is there XP on perlmonks? Or Karma on Slashdot? Or for that
matter, why do we grade students' exams (particularly, why do we of
Ofer Nave wrote:
Well, I'm just starting to write tests now. Once I'm comfortable with
that, in the future I can try writing the tests first. But the module
is already written, and I've already posted it many other places to get
feedback on design and implementation. It's not very complicated
Michael G Schwern wrote:
On Sat, Feb 12, 2005 at 12:47:56PM -0500, David A. Golden wrote:
The trouble with this interface is sometimes you want to collect a bunch
of output from a bunch of different functions together.
That's why I suggested that it be prototyped to take a code block:
stdo
Michael G Schwern wrote:
On Fri, Feb 11, 2005 at 07:30:24AM -0500, David Golden wrote:
stdout_is { fcn() } $string, "comment"; # exact
stdout_like{ fcn() } qr/regex/, "comment"; # regex match
stdout_count { fcn() } qr/regex/, $count, "comment"; # number of matches
stdout_found { fcn()
