David Gamey wrote: > It would be worth including some of the comments about easier without > the break etc. Possibly even having the second snippet of code.
David, Andrew (et al), Can someone point to me where the RC site says we have to solve each task in some *specific* way? I simply can't find anything that says that. The fact the the categories have certain titles doesn't say that to me - it simply says that they've titled the category using some short phrase identifying the functionality they think the task illustrates. It may simply represent a 'cultural bias' on how the author(s) *think* it will have to be solved given their programming background. Without something clearly spelling out implementation constraints, I'd prefer to view it that way. Even the RC intro page refers to RC as a "programming chrestomathy" site with a link to Wikipedia defining that term as demonstrating differences in syntax, semantics, and *idioms* [emphasis mine]. I worry that we're presenting Unicon/Icon poorly if we don't illustrate how the language helps solve a particular problem cleanly and clearly. -- Steve Wampler -- [email protected] The gods that smiled on your birth are now laughing out loud. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Download Intel® Parallel Studio Eval Try the new software tools for yourself. Speed compiling, find bugs proactively, and fine-tune applications for parallel performance. See why Intel Parallel Studio got high marks during beta. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-sw-dev _______________________________________________ Unicon-group mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/unicon-group
