RE: RE: [spoon-discuss] LOGAS

["Craig" <ragnarok@xxxxxxxxx>]

>>>>>Can I get a complete copy of the LOGAS somewhere?
>>>
>>>>I believe it's part of the Roster.
>>>
>>>Thanks. I've now reread the pseudocode rule. Since what counts as
>>>pseudocode
>>>can be redefined by precedent, and since everything abhorrent about
>>>pseudocode is at least as applicable to real code, I Kick the Pusher
Robot
>>>in the Ass. Perl is wonderful, but it should not be used for
>>>non-programming
>>>purposes.
>>
>>I may have to dispute your kick, son.  If the prop was actually in Perl,
it wasn't pseudocode.  It was code.

>Then I may have to modify either the LOGAS or the rules - after all, given
the fact that the rules do not state
>what language proposals must be in, I could make a prop in French, German
or Latin and you'd have to rely on
>translation to actually know what it meant.

Which is exactly why I expect the Kick to get recognized. But maybe it won't
be, since a strictly literal interpretation won't let it in. But really,
code is worse than pseudocode. Anyone can read pseudocode who can or ever
could write programs - ie, people like me who remember the theory but have
forgotten the specifics of any language they've ever learned - whereas code
only works if you understand the language in question (with a few notable
exceptions).

_______________________________________________
spoon-discuss mailing list
spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-discuss