Content deleted Content added
Line 259:
:I took out all the examples written in the form of a code repository, citing [[MOS:CODE]] a month ago. Now I'm getting some undos, with no edit summary and no discussion, and no attempt to reformat and pick examples that actually increase the encyclopedic nature of the article. I'm not willing to do this, because I don't think any of the example eliminated have encyclopedic nature, and believe a consensus was reached about these examples as well. I'm [[WP:AGF|assuming good faith]], but I will enforce my elimination without new talk or at least an edit summary on the undo. [[User:Wgunther|Wgunther]] ([[User talk:Wgunther|talk]]) 23:25, 11 January 2013 (UTC)
::I think we should return most of the code examples (excl. wrong ones, as C#). While it's the case that they do not add any encyclopedic value, I find them really useful when one tries to grasp anonymous recursion. They may provide better background for understanding somewhat more abstract way of implementing recursion with y-combinator serving as quick how-it's-done reference than more theoretically-inclined lambda calculus or ML/Haskell - imo most people comfort with these languages already have sound theoretical foundations and concrete code example adds little or no benefit. I suggest keeping at least Python/Javascript and Scheme/Lisp. [[User:БръмБръм|БръмБръм]] ([[User talk:БръмБръм|talk]]) 13:40, 14 February 2013 (UTC)
| |||