Eh, it's a simple program meant to test students' coding abilities,
right? Something like AES would put the focus where you don't want it;
Caesar ciphers seem ideally-suited for this.
Well yeah, but last year they had a game. That's way more exciting (well, okay, it did involve an ASCII troll in a cave or something) for students, and it doesn't require us to understand basic cryptography in order to pass a computing exam where cryptography isn't on the course (not that I object to learning about this, it's just something I find irking. Like the fact that you had to do GCSE IT in order to do A-level computing.)
What is this I don't even
That's a fair reaction. Most of our education system is stupid. The two-year thing we do before going to university, for no apparent reason other than to filter stupid people and further knowledge in four subjects of which three you're going to drop, is just one example.
Writing beautiful, efficient code is hugely satisfying, Unfortunately, it's also commercial suicide. <snip explanation of why it's commercial suicide>
I see your point, I just thought software developers had a slight sense of fun and could perhaps manage the brainpower to write efficient code at a reasonable rate. That said, I've been lurking here for a while, I should know better by now.
- Do you use source control? --> How would it work without?
- Can you make a build in one step? --> Building better is easy, if you want others to contribute.
- Do you make daily builds?--> Not automated, but there is a good chance that after each commit, someone else will try a build.
- Do you have a bug database? --> Comes for free with most OSS hosting sites.
- Do you fix bugs before writing new code? --> this can be a problem, when everyone only does what they find interesting
- Do you have an up-to-date schedule?--> larger projects mostly have/ does not apply, because there is no release deadline
- Do you have a spec?--> larger projects mostly have
- Do programmers have quiet working conditions?--> people can work where they want
- Do you use the best tools money can buy? --> everyone has to buy their own stuff
- Do
you have testers?--> depends on the popularity and release schedule,
often some people are willing to try the latest unstable build.
- Do new candidates write code during their interview? --> does not apply, contributed code can be rejected
- Do you do hallway usability testing?--> see #10
- It has been known for me to ask where source code is kept and to be emailed a zip file. Admittedly not often, but often enough.
- Most OSS build systems are multi-stage. Usually you generate a build script, then actually use said build script, assuming the meta-build-script thing didn't fail in the meantime.
- How many people do you think work on an average project? Usually one.
- Okay, I'll concede this one. But see #1.
-
-
- Yes. How many large OSS projects are there? Maybe hundreds. How many small ones? Probably millions.
- Usually in the front room with a screaming toddler, from what I've heard.
- Most use OSS tools. Which have...problems.
- #7
- Yes, but who actually rejects helpers unless you're really obsessive about code quality?
- I used to know what that meant, right now I just can't be bothered to go and find out.
(From my point of view)
To the people saying that it's okay to make 'pedestrian' (I like that word, I might use it more) code if it works well, the code I posted is both pedestrian and a terrible application.
Hey, whatever. Nice talking to you guys, fresh opinions always welcome. Guess I'm a little pissed that I've been staring at the same code for weeks in class now while my teacher mumbles something about subprocedures vs. functions, and whether he got it right or not(!).