ticalc.org
Basics Archives Community Services Programming
Hardware Help About Search Your Account
   Home :: Archives :: News :: The Quality of Our Archives

The Quality of Our Archives
Posted by Michael on 4 March 2004, 22:29 GMT

You may have noticed the low numbers of new files added to our archives. We're having a debate about what to do with a growing problem: Programs that simply aren't very useful to anyone. There are more quadratic solvers in our archives than should ever exist, notwithstanding the fact that most models have this as a built-in feature. Our possible solutions are:

Currently, all files that meet the site policies are processed and uploaded to our archives. Since this doesn't seem to be working well, here are the ideas under consideration:

  • The file archivers could manually screen programs for those deemed "junk", in the sense that they lower the signal-to-noise ratio of our archives rather than increase it. Authors would have to e-mail an appeal for rejected programs. This would cause a longer waiting time for processing files.
  • We could implement a rating system and organize programs by rating. This allows all programs to remain on the site, but the most useless could be filtered out. A method of dealing with new programs and low/high numbers of votes would have to be developed.
  • Our current folder system stops at games, programs, math, et cetera. For ease of browsing, this could be expanded to sub-categories like games/board, games/shooter, and games/guessthenumber. This doesn't limit the number of files added, it only categorizes them so folders are more concise and relevant.
  • Lastly, we could just leave everything as it is now.

We're asking for your input on what to do. There is a survey posted in conjunction with this article where you can vote on this issue. Thank you.

Update (Archiver): We will not be deleting files (at least not this time around), that was never one of the options. If you do want some of your programs deleted e-mail filearchive@ticalc.org.

  Reply to this article


The comments below are written by ticalc.org visitors. Their views are not necessarily those of ticalc.org, and ticalc.org takes no responsibility for their content.


teams
hat118  Account Info
(Web Page)

If we do an individual rating system, is there anyway we could make like teams with ratings?

I think that would be cool as some great programs have come out of the work of several people.

Reply to this comment    8 March 2004, 02:23 GMT

Re: The Quality of Our Archives
Ivan Papusha  Account Info
(Web Page)

Yes, I agree with this new idea too. Also, I think that people feel really stronly about this - this topic is one of the most replied-to topics on TICALC.ORG!

Reply to this comment    8 March 2004, 02:41 GMT

Re: The Quality of Our Archives
nyall Account Info
(Web Page)

I can't find a thread where I replied to Morgan.
Why was it deleted?

Reply to this comment    8 March 2004, 19:23 GMT

Re: Re: The Quality of Our Archives
joeman3429  Account Info

its a conspiracy, i bet they'll delete this one too....

Reply to this comment    9 March 2004, 00:37 GMT


Re: Re: The Quality of Our Archives
Morgan Davies  Account Info
(Web Page)

It was deleted by a staff member, because aparently the staff is not supposed to voice their opinion as string as I did. As I told them it made sence to me that we voice our opinion, thus you guys have the opportunity to directly try and change our minds since we will ultimately be making the final decision.

Reply to this comment    9 March 2004, 03:59 GMT

ME! / Challenge
shkaboinka  Account Info
(Web Page)

I don't mean to be offensive, but...there are so many new/inexperienced programmers, and even inexperienced-"epxerienced programmers". There are just SO many people making their own math programs and other common things like ticTacToe...and there are like thousands of each such program...

SO many of these programs are ineficient and I can do much better, etc, etc...but everybody wants to post all their work, right? that's the problem.

I CAN WRITE ANY BASIC PROGRAM BETTER THAN ANYBODY, etc etc...just challenge me. I can improve any program on many levels. No, seriously; even the best of you out there are sometimes questionable compared to the crazy crap I can do. I don't mind at all helping people learn to program better; just ask me and I can help or greatly improve anything (though sometimes I get distracted by school).

Reply to this comment    8 March 2004, 20:14 GMT

Re: ME! / Challenge
Mads Soendergaard  Account Info

There is actually an amount of very complicated high quality BASIC math program on ticalc. But it is so difficult to find them among all the small math programs that most give up!

<<I CAN WRITE ANY BASIC PROGRAM BETTER THAN ANYBODY, etc etc...just challenge me. I can improve any program on many levels. No, seriously; even the best of you out there are sometimes questionable compared to the crazy crap I can do. I don't mind at all helping people learn to program better; just ask me and I can help or greatly improve anything (though sometimes I get distracted by school).>>

This claim just shows that you are an incompetent little kid!
Bye

Reply to this comment    8 March 2004, 22:36 GMT


Re: Re: ME! / Challenge
joeman3429  Account Info

how is he an incompetent little kid??????????????????
???????????????????? ????????????????????????? ??????????????????? ???????????????????????????
????????????????????? ?????????????????????????
????????????????????? ?????????????????????????
it sounds to me like he works hard in school and programs in his free time, that sounds very competent to me

Reply to this comment    9 March 2004, 00:44 GMT


Re: Re: Re: ME! / Challenge
Mads Soendergaard  Account Info

The quality problem in ticalc is caused by a huge amount of programmers that produce many simple small and untested programs. A good example is your own simple creation mathprgm:
1) Try to type F3, p and enter - gives a test error.
2) Furthermore you can enter complex/negative numbers where they don’t belong.
3) You have not declared a single variable as local –a really big problem.
In 1) and 2) you could have used gettype() or getmode(“Complex Format”)=”REAL” in 2).
I am convinced that XX is unable to improve anything. Simply because he wants to make a lot of fast “crazy” programs instead of a few well tested ones - so he is not better off than other incompetent! I hope you will realize that my point isn’t that you should stop or fell bad about programming - programming is funny;-) However, you and others should think more carefully, so one can avoid all the simple bugs!!

Reply to this comment    9 March 2004, 13:42 GMT


Re: Re: Re: Re: ME! / Challenge
Mads Soendergaard  Account Info

And XX is shkaboinka of cause.

Reply to this comment    9 March 2004, 13:50 GMT

Re: ME! / Challenge
ET Account Info
(Web Page)

> I CAN WRITE ANY BASIC PROGRAM BETTER THAN ANYBODY

Which is why you resort to calling a program Halflife just to grab people's attention?! How did that ever get past the file archivers?

Most interesting Basic programs in my opinion aren't about a few slightly optimized gotos, its about what *logic* goes into a program -- for example fixing that bug in your tic-tac-toe program :)

Reply to this comment    8 March 2004, 22:58 GMT


Re: Re: ME! / Challenge
mike White Account Info

any one can make an alright program the real programer is the one that would start all over if something was wrong like my link blackjack i made it 5 times before i thoght it was good enuf for ticalc and my draw took me 6 tryes thats just how it is no one can write a good program in one sitting unless you just want it out there no matter how bad or you could just be perfect which no one is.

Reply to this comment    9 March 2004, 00:15 GMT


Re: Re: Re: ME! / Challenge
qbman  Account Info

Are you saying you write the whole program, then scrap it if it doesn't work? Maybe you should try writing it in parts. Just in case, you can use the recal function on the calc to copy lines from one program into one you are working on so that you can write the main program as many small parts and then past the finished program together when you are done debugging the smaller parts.

Reply to this comment    10 March 2004, 15:14 GMT


Re: ME! / Challenge
qbman  Account Info

Hey, aren't you supposed to be working on that compiler for hlz80? You might have more time to work on it if you would quit bragging.

Reply to this comment    10 March 2004, 15:09 GMT

Re: The Quality of Our Archives
mike White Account Info

this is sort of off topic but when if ever will the search ever be up and running? but the link to google is good

Reply to this comment    9 March 2004, 00:06 GMT

Re: The Quality of Our Archives
TiBasic  Account Info
(Web Page)

I Like the Rating Plan: That way the ones that are really bad are at the bottom of the list and programmers wont be mad that their program is gone.

Reply to this comment    9 March 2004, 00:07 GMT

Re: The Quality of Our Archives
W Hibdon  Account Info

I think that it is a decidedly bad idea to make people to totally omit the low ranked files. I can see being able to sort, but it would be bad for the not so popular games to do anything at all stat-wise. The game might be good, but just not popular. I know this is a self serving plea, but it is true for others besides myself.

-W-

Reply to this comment    9 March 2004, 01:53 GMT


Re: Re: The Quality of Our Archives
Morgan Davies  Account Info
(Web Page)

With the rating system you would have the option of showing all the files if you wanted, or if you wanted just some of the better programs.

Reply to this comment    9 March 2004, 03:55 GMT

Re: The Quality of Our Archives
jordan krage  Account Info

>>We will not be deleting files (at least not this time around), that was never one of the options

of course not, u would never do that, this was just a crazy scheme that angelboy cooked up to let off some of his anger for repetitive basic programmers, lol ;)

Reply to this comment    9 March 2004, 02:08 GMT


 
angelboy Account Info
(Web Page)

Mmmm...I make some good grilled cheese...

Reply to this comment    9 March 2004, 03:24 GMT


Re:
Jeremiah Walgren Account Info
(Web Page)

I hear pie is good. Can you make that? (No, not pi, PIE.)

Reply to this comment    9 March 2004, 04:24 GMT


Re: Re:
ti_guy  Account Info

Just speaking of pi makes me hungry. Mmmmm....3.1415926yadayadyada

Reply to this comment    9 March 2004, 05:19 GMT


Re: Re: Re:
Ben Cherry  Account Info
(Web Page)

pi day is coming! less than a week away!

Reply to this comment    9 March 2004, 06:50 GMT


Re: Re: Re: Re:
Lewk Account Info

Yeah! maybe I'll shave pi onto the back of my head!

Reply to this comment    12 March 2004, 04:57 GMT

1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  

You can change the number of comments per page in Account Preferences.

  Copyright © 1996-2011, the ticalc.org project. All rights reserved. | Contact Us | Disclaimer