rang@cs.wisc.edu (Anton Rang) (05/03/91)
In article <1991May2.221106.5618@cs.columbia.edu> blair@cs.columbia.edu (Blair Seidler) writes: >The real problem is that it is much easier to use the >objective (does it produce the correct output) judging procedure than the >subjective (would a good programmer have organized this code this way). This is definitely a problem. Of course, judging "objectively" can be difficult too. Even at the ACM nationals the way things are now, there have been a lot of problems involving ambiguous problem specifications and the like. (Well, actually I don't know about the past three or four years, but before then....) BTW, is anyone else upset that Turbo Pascal is commonly used at contests rather than Standard Pascal? :-/ Probably not. Anton +---------------------------+------------------+-------------+----------------+ | Anton Rang (grad student) | rang@cs.wisc.edu | UW--Madison | "VMS Forever!" | +---------------------------+------------------+-------------+----------------+
rothstei@mcs.kent.edu (Michael Rothstein) (05/03/91)
In article <RANG.91May2234522@nexus.cs.wisc.edu> rang@cs.wisc.edu (Anton Rang) writes: <remarks about objectivity deleted> > > BTW, is anyone else upset that Turbo Pascal is commonly used at >contests rather than Standard Pascal? :-/ Probably not. Well, I am: one reason why we did not participate last year was that I felt we would not be able to compete with all the Turbo-experts, since we have made a point of not using PC's. Our dept. owns exactly 1, and I have a feeling we cannot afford to move it or purchase one for programming contest use :-(. -- Michael Rothstein (Kent State U) | ``The above are my personal (rothstei@cs.kent.edu) | beliefs and opinions, not KSU's''
glenn@curie.ces.cwru.edu (Glenn Crocker) (05/03/91)
rang@cs.wisc.edu (Anton Rang) writes:
This is definitely a problem. Of course, judging "objectively" can
be difficult too. Even at the ACM nationals the way things are now,
there have been a lot of problems involving ambiguous problem
specifications and the like. (Well, actually I don't know about the
past three or four years, but before then....)
The nationals contest was beautiful last year. I had no problem with
how the problems were stated or with how the contest was run. The
regional contest I went to this year, however....
BTW, is anyone else upset that Turbo Pascal is commonly used at
contests rather than Standard Pascal? :-/ Probably not.
No. Turbo Pascal is standard Pascal. Live with it or don't use Pascal.
(Sorry, a little bigotry here. I use C anyways.) Seriously, I can
understand why people wouldn't want to use Turbo, but it is a very
nice system. Is it actually possible to program in Standard Pascal,
or do all Pascal compilers have hacks to make the language usable
for real work? (i.e. assign(), reset(), etc.) Clearly, I don't know
my Pascal standards (other than Turbo :-) very well.
Question: I didn't go to nationals this year and was wondering whether
they ended up using unix for the contest. They were talking about it
at one point.... If they did use it, did they strip down the library
so that it didn't include unixisms like popen?
--
Glenn Crocker | Your milage may vary.
glenn@ces.cwru.edu | Light bar not for occupant protection.
CWRU, Cleveland, OH | Don't drive on frozen lakes.
W (216)368-6133 H (216)754-1314 | Do not taunt Happy Fun Ball.blair@cs.columbia.edu (Blair Seidler) (05/04/91)
In article <GLENN.91May3123813@curie.ces.cwru.edu> glenn@curie.ces.cwru.edu (Glenn Crocker) writes: > >Question: I didn't go to nationals this year and was wondering whether >they ended up using unix for the contest. They were talking about it >at one point.... If they did use it, did they strip down the library >so that it didn't include unixisms like popen? > We had the pleasure of using System V Unix. Of course, not only did they kill the Unixisms, but they wiped out a bunch of functions in an effort to reduce C to the utility level of Pascal. But at least we had C and Unix... -- Blair A. Seidler Teaching Assistant, Department of Computer Science (212) 853-6874 Columbia University "Columbia University School of Engineering and Applied Science does not even know that my opinions exist, and would ignore them if it did."
rang@cs.wisc.edu (Anton Rang) (05/04/91)
In article <GLENN.91May3123813@curie.ces.cwru.edu> glenn@curie.ces.cwru.edu (Glenn Crocker) writes: >The nationals contest was beautiful last year. I had no problem with >how the problems were stated or with how the contest was run. The >regional contest I went to this year, however.... Glad to hear nationals turned out well; hopefully your regional contest will be better next year. Hmm...do most regions have a lot of communication between the people holding the contests each year? The problem (at least one) with the regional contests is that they keep moving around, and so people don't get as much experience with them. (At least, it seems that way, though the regionals I've been at were quite good, especially the first year.) I wrote earlier: > BTW, is anyone else upset that Turbo Pascal is commonly used at > contests rather than Standard Pascal? :-/ Probably not. > >No. Turbo Pascal is standard Pascal. Live with it or don't use Pascal. >(Sorry, a little bigotry here. I use C anyways.) Well, the problem I have with it is that it's a particular dialect of the language, and that people are likely to learn different dialects. I hope that all universities which teach Pascal at least tell their students *what* the standard is, and where the implementation they're using differs. (Of course, there are three standards--ANSI, and the two ISO levels--but....) For instance, I learned Pascal on a UCSD-based system, and when I went to college, under VMS. These don't have much in common, except for the standard subset, which they implement essentially the same. The real problem I have with Turbo is that, at least a few years ago, its semantics for some of the standard I/O routines were *different* from those of standard Pascal. We went through about two weeks of special practice before our regionals to teach ourselves just what the difference were. >Is it actually possible to program in Standard Pascal, or do all >Pascal compilers have hacks to make the language usable for real >work? (i.e. assign(), reset(), etc.) Sure, it's possible to program in Standard Pascal. You're not likely to be able to do much "real work" using it, but I haven't seen any contests in which the Standard Pascal subset was a hindrance. I've been at a regional contest which used strictly standard Pascal (it was on a VMS system, compiled with /STANDARD, which flags any differences from the standard--programs which weren't standard were not acceptable). Most compilers do have extensions, but they're all quite different, it seems. I'd prefer to see ACM promoting the standard (and if the Pascal standards aren't good enough for "real work", maybe somebody should ponder extending the standards...of course, Extended Pascal is starting to get implemented now, or whatever it's called). Ah well. It is something that people should keep in mind, I think. Anton +---------------------------+------------------+-------------+----------------+ | Anton Rang (grad student) | rang@cs.wisc.edu | UW--Madison | "VMS Forever!" | +---------------------------+------------------+-------------+----------------+
peter@ficc.ferranti.com (Peter da Silva) (05/06/91)
In article <1991May3.150303.22506@mcs.kent.edu> rothstei@mcs.kent.edu (Michael Rothstein) writes: > In article <RANG.91May2234522@nexus.cs.wisc.edu> rang@cs.wisc.edu (Anton Rang) writes: > > BTW, is anyone else upset that Turbo Pascal is commonly used at > >contests rather than Standard Pascal? :-/ Probably not. > Well, I am: one reason why we did not participate last year was that I > felt we would not be able to compete with all the Turbo-experts... Perhaps these contests should use an unusual or unfamiliar language to handicap everyone equally? I vote for BCPL (no, just kidding. Really. I meant Forth. Hey! No hitting!). -- Peter da Silva. `-_-' peter@ferranti.com +1 713 274 5180. 'U` "Have you hugged your wolf today?"
shack@cs.arizona.edu (David Shackelford) (05/07/91)
In article <1991May3.150303.22506@mcs.kent.edu> rothstei@mcs.kent.edu (Michael Rothstein) writes: > In article <RANG.91May2234522@nexus.cs.wisc.edu> rang@cs.wisc.edu (Anton Rang) writes: > > BTW, is anyone else upset that Turbo Pascal is commonly used at > >contests rather than Standard Pascal? :-/ Probably not. > Well, I am: one reason why we did not participate last year was that I > felt we would not be able to compete with all the Turbo-experts... I have a decidedly PC-oriented viewpoint in this area. Turbo IS the standard Pascal, IMHO. Other Pascals need to change to the Turbo way of doing things. (With exception of machine-specifics). When I program in "standard" Pascal I get completely lost because you can't do ANYTHING in it! For the college level contests, I think the only way to go is ANSI C. Better would be C++, but not enough people know it yet... For the high school level, it's a tossup between Pascal and BASIC. David Shackelford shack@cs.arizona.edu UofA ACM Secretary
rothstei@mcs.kent.edu (Michael Rothstein) (05/09/91)
In article <1494@caslon.cs.arizona.edu> shack@cs.arizona.edu (David Shackelford) writes: > >I have a decidedly PC-oriented viewpoint in this area. Turbo IS the >standard Pascal, IMHO. Other Pascals need to change to the Turbo way >of doing things. (With exception of machine-specifics). When I >program in "standard" Pascal I get completely lost because you can't >do ANYTHING in it! Well, unfortunately, it was not Borland, but ISO who defined the standard, though I must agree they came up with a very cr*ppy standard: yes, I would prefer some extras: an OTHERWISE clause for case statements, incrementing/decrementing by something different from 1, more control structures, different syntax, blah, blah, blah. Only one problem: they new language would still have problems!!! ;-) The perfect programming language (even single purpose, for ALL tastes) has not been invented, and I doubt we will see such a beast within our lifetimes. What we have is ISO Pascal and/or ANSI C, and I think they will stick with us (at least contest-wise) for a few years. (Yeah, I also hope they add C++ soon!) I certainly hope we are using the standards, not some enhanced versions! There is another bone I have to pick on here: notice I said OTHERWISE, not ELSE above: I DO NOT share this PC-orientation mentioned above: in fact, IMO PC's are expensive single user boxes which should not have been invented: at any rate, as I mentioned before, we don't have any, nor are we unhappy about it: we preferred to spend our equipment moneys in a more effective manner. > >For the college level contests, I think the only way to go is ANSI C. >Better would be C++, but not enough people know it yet... > >For the high school level, it's a tossup between Pascal and BASIC. ^^^^^ "It is practically impossible to teach good programming to students who've had a prior exposure to Basic; as potential programmers they are mentally mutilated beyond hope of regeneration." Edsgar Dijkstra (though not quite as extreme as he is, I also think we should not encourage the usage of Basic). > >David Shackelford shack@cs.arizona.edu >UofA ACM Secretary Let me finish this note with a thank you to all of those who showed your support to my previous posting. THANKS! -- Michael Rothstein (Kent State U)| If cars want to kill themselves, (rothstei@cs.kent.edu) | that's their problem: what I can't | understand is why they keep doing it (std. disclaimer) | with people inside. (Mafalda (Quino))
shack@cs.arizona.edu (David Shackelford) (05/18/91)
In article <1991May9.124840.77@falcon.aamrl.wpafb.af.mil> bkottmann@falcon.aamrl.wpafb.af.mil (Brett Kottmann) writes: > If your beef is the editor, then I agree. You should be able to bring >in your favorite editor, and just have to compile under Turbo. > >Brett This sounds like a good idea to me. Some people dislike the Turbo IDE and edit programs with their favorite editor, then use the command-line compiler. It would be necessary to have editor disks inspected by judges to verify that no program material is brought in this way. If sufficient people show interest, this idea should be forwarded to the contest committe for possible inclusion in the rules. David Shackelford | shack@cs.arizona.edu Univ of AZ Chapter Secretary
peter@ficc.ferranti.com (Peter da Silva) (05/20/91)
In article <1991May9.124840.77@falcon.aamrl.wpafb.af.mil> bkottmann@falcon.aamrl.wpafb.af.mil (Brett Kottmann) writes: > > Perhaps these contests should use an unusual or unfamiliar language to > > handicap everyone equally? I vote for BCPL (no, just kidding. Really. > > I meant Forth. Hey! No hitting!). > Seriously, though. Do you really mean "standard" pascal, the one you > can't do much of anything in? No. Actualy if it were to be Pascal I'd choose UCSD, which is at least a proper superset of the standard. No, I would recommend something like Euclid or Eiffel. This would serve the dual purpose of avoiding any special advantage to any particular side, and it'd expose people to new languages. Actually, how about a different language for each problem? Then you could really include oddball ones like Forth or Prolog. -- Peter da Silva; Ferranti International Controls Corporation; +1 713 274 5180; Sugar Land, TX 77487-5012; `-_-' "Have you hugged your wolf, today?"
peter@ficc.ferranti.com (Peter da Silva) (05/20/91)
In article <1520@caslon.cs.arizona.edu> shack@cs.arizona.edu (David Shackelford) writes: > It would be necessary to have editor disks inspected by judges > to verify that no program material is brought in this way. OK, I'll pick GNU Emacs! Let's see them inspect *that*! -- Peter da Silva; Ferranti International Controls Corporation; +1 713 274 5180; Sugar Land, TX 77487-5012; `-_-' "Have you hugged your wolf, today?"
dave@tygra.Michigan.COM (David Conrad) (05/27/91)
In article <1520@caslon.cs.arizona.edu> shack@cs.arizona.edu (David Shackelford) writes: > >This sounds like a good idea to me. Some people dislike the Turbo IDE >and edit programs with their favorite editor, then use the command-line >compiler. It would be necessary to have editor disks inspected by judges >to verify that no program material is brought in this way. > Maybe better to provide copies of brief, qedit, elvis, micro-emacs, etc. It would be too easy to sneak something past the judges if you had an editor which they were not familiar with. > >David Shackelford | shack@cs.arizona.edu >Univ of AZ Chapter Secretary David Conrad, dave@michigan.com -- = CAT-TALK Conferencing Network, Computer Conferencing and File Archive = - 1-313-343-0800, 300/1200/2400/9600 baud, 8/N/1. New users use 'new' - = as a login id. AVAILABLE VIA PC-PURSUIT!!! (City code "MIDET") = E-MAIL Address: dave@Michigan.COM