|
:[[User:Mike-c-in-mv|Mike-c-in-mv]] ([[User talk:Mike-c-in-mv|talk]]) 23:44, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
::@[[User:AmandaSLawrence|AmandaSLawrence]] [[Special:Contributions/117.20.112.19|117.20.112.19]] ([[User talk:117.20.112.19|talk]]) 00:25, 6 January 2024 (UTC)
== Computer algorithms ==
I've removed the opening paragraph of this section; it was incomprehensible, and uncited. I think it was trying to explain what distinguishes algorithms implemented on computers from other algorithms.
The remaining part of the section seems to consist of a list of questions, accompanied by "answers" from various CS luminaries, concerning subjects like efficiency and elegance. This material needs distilling, to produce a section that actually has something to say.
The thing is, I don't think the section (as currently titled) will ever have anything to say, because "computer algorithms" are simply algorithms; and indeed, the section quotes Knuth, pointing out that ""the best way to learn an algorithm is to try it . . . immediately take pen and paper and work through an example". With that quote, the section undermines itself; if you can work through a computer algorithm without a computer, then it's just an algorithm.
I propose to blank the section; I would try to improve it, but I don't get what the section is trying to say. I'll leave it for a day or so, in the hope that someone can distill meaning out of it.
[[User:MrDemeanour|MrDemeanour]] ([[User talk:MrDemeanour|talk]]) 12:17, 11 February 2022 (UTC)
: Thanks! I 100% agree that this section is confusing. I'm not sure of the exact intention of the original author. I think a section regarding "implementation of algorithms" would be useful, but if that is the intended scope, then the discussion seems to contain a lot of irrelevant detail.
: I'd like to avoid completely removing it as I think editors are often too quick to delete others' work rather than edit/incorporate. It seems like much of the discussion is actually about ''representing'' algorithms in computers, rather than implementing them. Hence the different Turing-complete models of computation. So I would suggest that that part of the discussion be moved to "Expressing algorithms". The rest could find a place somewhere else or be deleted. Does that change make sense?
: [[User:Caleb Stanford|Caleb Stanford]] ([[User talk:Caleb Stanford|talk]]) 16:45, 11 February 2022 (UTC)
:::: Well, I'm not going to try to copy-edit this material and then try to distribute certain (which?) parts through the rest of the article, since I've already said that I think it's incomprehensible; I'm obviously not competent to do that work.
:::: And since there is no clear support here for deletion, then despite the fact that I think deletion would improve the article, I'm not going to delete.
:::: [[User:MrDemeanour|MrDemeanour]] ([[User talk:MrDemeanour|talk]]) 15:08, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
== Why is Algorithm written with an "i" instead of a "y"? ==
| 