Talk:Pseudocode

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Archives

[edit] PHP code stub format

Is it really a good idea to give a piece of bad-practice code as an example? Wouter Lievens 08:19, 29 August 2005 (UTC)

Nope, so please feel free to improve! :)  [I'm no PHP programmer myself.]  --Wernher 08:31, 29 August 2005 (UTC)
I've removed the extraneous code stub and improved the PHP stub. It's still simple to the point of simplisticness, but it's better. The original was just horrible though. — Ambush Commander(Talk) 04:34, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Is there a standard pseudocode format?

If there is, then it should be mentioned. If not, then the more popular ones should be. Gflores 03:08, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

As far as I know, there is no standard or even a popular pseudocode format. There are some well-known ones that have appeared in major publications such as the CLRS pseudocode, but these were not emulated to any extent that I know of. It seems like pretty much everyone invents their own pseudocode. Deco 20:01, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

Just for my own reference, I'm going to mention a few things here:

I think I'm not allowed to mention them in the article, because of some silly rule claiming that Wikipedia articles are not supposed to mention Wikipedia. --68.0.120.35 20:47, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Actually I created Category:Articles with example pidgincode and Category:Articles with example pseudocode in October 2006, with very similar content as the above category (created by user:Quuxplusone), but it was deleted. I never understood the arguments. One argument was that there should be no "articles with example code" at all. Very strange, they still remain. See Wikipedia:Categories_for_deletion/Log/2006_October_17#Category:Articles_with_example_pidgincode
After that I tried to make a list of those articles in the pseudo code article, but that was also deleted.
Someone suggested on my user talk page that I should retag those articles with example code category, but I gave up.
I hope the category will be kept. The main argument for keeping it is of course not that it is helpful when creating wikipedia articles, but that it is helpful when creating academic articles including pseudo code.
I have now added some mathematical style psuedo code examples in the category. Mange01 (talk) 10:43, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Dummy code

I got redirected to "pseudocode" after clicking on a link for "dummy code" on the disambiguation page for "dummy." From the description given there, it doesn't seem like that redirect should happen. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Blueyoshi321 (talk • contribs) 17 October 2006

Good comment. I have created a new dummy code stub. Please feel free to add information. Mange01 16:17, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Psudocode

NO WAI WIKIPEDIA! PSUDOCODE IS DERIVED FROM "PSUDO" AND "CODE"? Just my 2¢... ½¹²³€½¾¡⅛£¼⅜⅝⅞™±°¿ 02:09, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Why PHP?

Why is the examle in PHP? To me, it doesn't represent a general programming language. Could we use C? Gutworth 01:48, 30 April 2007 (UTC)


  Why not just put an example of booth in the article? 12:13, 08 November 2007  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.241.188.50 (talk)

[edit] Quality

This article is, on the one hand, very poorly sourced, and the other, a sketchy treatment of pseudocode that seems to rely on original research and the understanding of the authors, not independently documented public knowledge. Should it be flagged? KenThomas (talk) 18:54, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Please be less sketchy in your criticism. :) Or suggest concrete improvements. Is four sources poor? The PHP example perhaps originates from someones own work. Except from that, the article is not based on original research. I have contributed especially to the mathematical style pseudocode issues, and to the definitions. I started out from a large number of definitions that I found on the net and rephrased them. (None of them were authorities, so I did no mention them in the reference list.) The sentences about i/o varibles in the lead (I did not write that) could be improved and made more generic since it is very application specific. Mange01 (talk) 11:19, 4 February 2008 (UTC)


[edit] "Category:Articles with example pseudocode" is nominated for deletion

Category:Articles with example pseudocode is nominated for deletion. You can vote Keep or Delete at the CfD debate. Mange01 (talk) 15:33, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

The result of the discussion was Keep. Mange01 (talk) 22:38, 21 February 2008 (UTC)