Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Computer science/Archive 6

This is an archive of past discussions on Wikipedia:WikiProject Computer science. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

←

Archive 4

→

Delay Insensitive Minterm Synthesis

As part of the Notability wikiproject, I am trying to sort out whether Delay Insensitive Minterm Synthesis is notable enough to have its own article. I would appreciate an expert opinion. If you can spare some time, please add your comments to the article's talk page. Thanks! --B. Wolterding 08:43, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

DSSP (programming)

Another request from the Notability wikiproject: It's about DSSP (programming), a historical programming language. Again, I would appreciate an expert opinion. If you can spare some time, please add your comments to the article's talk page. Thanks! --B. Wolterding 09:05, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Well, guys! Follow the links to Moscow University and the inWiki ones to ternary and Setun! Are ternary computers really that unnotable? Said: Rursus ☺ ★ 07:07, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Still not resolved. I have proposed a merger to Setun now. You can participate in the discussion on the article's talk page. --B. Wolterding 07:56, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

I've participated. Said: Rursus ☺ ★ 08:13, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Question: redirect GUID's?

I think it would be nice to redirect GUID's, like 00000000-0000-0000-C000-000000000046 to articles about what they represent (if we have them), but I'm not sure if that's allowed. If you have any opinions on the subject, please have a chat at Talk:Globally Unique Identifier, where I first asked the question. Thanks and bye, Shinobu 21:55, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Run-time complexity

I'm drafting an article on run-time complexity, as I'm of the opinion that computational complexity theory does an OK (but not great) job of talking about P- and NP-complete classifications but doesn't adequately cover asymptotic limits of monotonically increasing functions that measure algorithm running times (see my comments at complexity theory's talk page). Groupthink 22:33, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Unstructured programming

This article really needs to be merged to Structured programming but I am just too lazy to do it. So, if anyone feels like stepping up ... Bueller? Bueller? --Ideogram 21:06, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Run-time analysis

As promised, I have posted an article on run-time analysis. Feedback and contributions would be considered very welcome. Groupthink 21:15, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Demo groups

Within the next few days I'll be taking a look at Category:Demo groups to see if there is anything that I should send to AfD. I was wondering if there are any good places to search for sources on these articles, or if there was a rough consensus on anything within the article that makes the subject notable- I see lots of the groups have won assorted awards, but I don't know of that's significant at all.-Wafulz 02:49, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Farouk Kamoun

a Tunisian computer scientist, and professor of computer science at ENSI . This article is currently proposed for deletion. I can't tell how important he is, and though someone here might like to have a look.DGG 17:46, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

I get an immense number of google hits. My estimate is that keep would be a nice first working hypothesis, if all the hits can be verified to are belong to him. Said: Rursus ☺ ★ 07:20, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

TropLux

As part of the Notability wikiproject, I am trying to sort out whether TropLux is notable enough to have its own article. I would appreciate an expert opinion. If you can spare some time, please add your comments to the article's talk page. Thanks! --B. Wolterding 17:43, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Lisp Not-A-Task-Force

Today I went to look up some item of information about X3J13, and was surprised at the sentence-length stub we had on it. I've fleshed it out a bit more, but something stirred me to check Category:Lisp programming language; sure enough, a lot of Lisp articles are very stubby or need improvement, and I'm sure there are a lot of notable subjects that aren't covered at all. Even format is only one sentence long, and that's practically a language in its own right (see [1] for a humorous example). Even CMUCL and Tom Knight have tiny offerings, and there are a few dozen Scheme implementation articles that could grow larger than a paragraph (although, actually, I'd like to see some notability evidence for some of these while we're at it). Also, we have one (1) article in Category:Free software programmed in Lisp? That seems implausibly small to me.

I don't know if we should make an actual Lisp Taskforce, for now I just thought I'd bring it to people's attention and get some feedback. I intend to do a good deal of work in this area myself, and if many people join in then we might have a case for an actual Taskforce, I guess.

--_{tiny plastic} Grey Knight ⊖ 15:25, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm (future tense) unofficially (and in secret) in this not-a-task-force. Said: Rursus ☺ ★ 07:28, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Collaboration of the month?

It seems a number of other WikiProjects have collaborations of the month. It might not be bad to jump on the bandwagon. --NotQuiteEXPComplete 12:34, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

I like this idea. Iknowyourider (t c) 14:21, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

It sounds like a good idea, but this is a very quiet WikiProject — could we pull it off effectively? I like the idea, though. It would be an effective way of bringing articles up to scratch. Angus Lepper^{(T, C, D)} 14:37, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

The Computer science collaboration of the month has been revived twice and both times died for lack of interest. --Ideogram 17:14, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Angus and Ideogram are right - the collaboration of the week/month has never really seemed to catch on around here. But you're welcome to try again. Perhaps we've finally reached a critical mass where things would actually get done. You can find the earlier CotW infrastructure here. --Allan McInnes (talk) 00:43, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

We need some kind of organization, I don't think I have the effort to take on a whole computer science article on my own :P MattOates (Ulti) 18:58, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Hmm, common interests (or lack thereof) might also be a problem. Looking at the participant list, there seem to be a lot of different interests. Good for breadth, but probably bad for collaboration. --NotQuiteEXPComplete 11:47, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Expert review: COIN-OR SYMPHONY

As part of the Notability wikiproject, I am trying to sort out whether COIN-OR SYMPHONY is notable enough for an own article. I would appreciate an expert opinion. For details, see the article's talk page. If you can spare some time, please add your comments there. Thanks! --B. Wolterding 19:06, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Expert review: PHP Object Generator

As part of the Notability wikiproject, I am trying to sort out whether PHP Object Generator is notable enough for an own article. I would appreciate an expert opinion. For details, see the article's talk page. If you can spare some time, please add your comments there. Thanks! --B. Wolterding 17:36, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Commented. Angus Lepper^{(T, C, D)} 22:21, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Interview with Robert Cailliau

Hi everyone,

we are preparing an interview at Wikinews with Robert Cailliau, all insightful questions are most welcome here: Wikinews:Story preparation/Interview with Robert Cailliau.

--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 15:35, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Evaluation strategies

The area of evaluation strategies could use some expansion. For instance, an evaluation strategy (for lambda calculus) comprises an argument strategy, function strategy and value (what you're looking for) form.

Argument strategy
- Call-by-name (copy arguments)
- Call-by-value (copy/share arguments, also further subdivided according to value form as below)
- Call-by-need (share arguments)
Function strategy
- Substitute-by-name
- Substitute-by-need
- Substitute-by-value (subdivided into HNF, NF)
Value form
- Normal form (is this the same as beta normal form?) - NF
- Head normal form - HNF
- Weak normal form - WNF
- Weak head normal form - WHNF
- Strict

Many of these concepts have no articles, nor mention. Gleaned from [2].

—porges_(talk) 22:42, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Peer review for World Community Grid

I've requested a peer review of the article World Community Grid. You're welcome to improve the article and/or leave comments at Wikipedia:Peer review/World Community Grid. —Remember the dot ^(talk) 22:59, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Reciprocity in network

The CS-related article Reciprocity in network needs some attention. I'm not sure the topic is notable, and if it is, it needs a huge amount of cleanup. --Nethgirb 22:36, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Jonas Jacobi

In my heroic (and maybe vain) quest for Swedish Computer Scientists I found a guy Jonas Jacobi that, by my preliminary investigation has written 0.5 book and 0 scientific articles, won 0 scientific awards, and the article seems to have been created by User:Jonas.Jacobi. Fishy! He is active within the area of AJAX+something. Before marking the article for deletion, I wish opinions from some who may know more. Said: Rursus ☺ ★ 09:51, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Template:Notability added to page! Said: Rursus ☺ ★ 09:57, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Might as well escalate it right up to WP:AFD or Wikipedia:Speedy deletions as a blatant advertisement / vanity page. --Nethgirb 10:28, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Very likely – except I'm a vindicator of the giant orphan-page-eater monster-bot, as the means to remove non-needed articles - so I'll wait a little while more. Said: Rursus ☺ ★ 12:17, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Oh, darn very stupid, moronic idiot me!! I didn't read and conclude correctly: in search for the guy that wrote 0.5 book in AJAX (and Java and some other TLA-mess), I made the infinitely stupid moronic mistake of surfing into his company web page... guess if I was forced to use killall -KILL mozilla, ... or not? For the safety of all wikipedians, I'll blatantly refuse to mention which web page. Just don't try to find web pages made by this guy! A killall -KILL mozilla may actually qualify for WP:AFD. Soon! Said: Rursus ☺ ★ 13:02, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

If the logical connexion between killall -KILL mozilla and WP:AFD is unclear, then consider this modification: "the guy that wrote 0.5 factually misleading book that incites readers to make web pages making gecko-based browsers hangup". Said: Rursus ☺ ★ 13:10, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

And as everybody know: 0.5·0 = 0. Said: Rursus ☺ ★ 13:27, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Jonas Jacobi - Article For Deletion, please have an opinion!

Reasons and opinions Here!! Said: Rursus ☺ ★ 15:07, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Peanut gallery

This started out hilarious and only got funnier. I can't wait to see what happens next. --Csphdmoney 14:54, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Systemshock

Hi. Could I ask some of you to take a look at an AfD for Systemshock, an online community site and forum in South Africa please. Thanks. --Malcolmxl5 07:31, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Task force for video compression topics?

I've looked through video compression topics in Wikipedia recently and many are badly written or completely inaccurate if they even exist, and many important topics don't exist at all.

I've created:

and done major overhauls on

and some others I don't remember, but the job is hardly even started.

Who else would be interested in some sort of collaboration with the job of

Finding video compression articles in need of improvement.
Improving those articles.
Finding references for those articles.
Creating new articles for video compression topics that aren't already covered.

—Dark•Shikari^[T] 20:11, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

I would suggest that Average bitrate should be merged into Bitrate. It's essentially just a definition (and the definition is what you'd expect from the words "average" and "bitrate" :-) ). --Nethgirb 21:12, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Definitely a good move. All the types of bitrate distributions (CBR, Constant-Quantizer VBR, Constant-Quality VBR, and Average Bitrate VBR [both one-pass and twopass]) should be included in the Bitrate article. —Dark•Shikari^[T] 21:32, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Root nameserver

I am doing a report on the effects on american life if the root nameservers was ever to completly DDOSed. And to my surprise, the article mentions nothing on just how bad this could be. I think it should be expanded to include information on what could happen if the root nameserver was ever to be dosed or hacked, as the damage it would do could be astronomical (I think). Im only a high school student, and most of my knowledge of computer tech. is self taught (so I could be way wrong about rns), but to me this sounds like a big deal and should be included. Warrush —Preceding unsigned comment added by Warrush (talk • contribs) 17:56, August 30, 2007 (UTC)

I notice there's a bit about it in DNS Backbone DDoS Attacks --Nethgirb 20:39, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Encoding tables

Compare KOI7 and Shift JIS. Please ignore the difference in font-size (this is caused by the obviously different size requirements of both encodings) and have a look at the other layout aspects. Which looks better, according to you? In particular, what do you like better:

0 1 2 x 0 1 2 or 0x 1x 2x x x0 x1 x2?
Blue on grey or black on colour?
Linked or not linked?
Underlined or not? (If you have a link, you'd probably go for underlined, but it might cause confusion... or not?)

I'd like to hear your opinions and perhaps we can think of some kind of standard or boilerplate format. Bye, Shinobu 19:09, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

Here are my personal opinions:

I prefer 0 1 2 x 0 1 2
I prefer black/blue on gray
I prefer linked, with exceptions for very massive amounts of tabulated data such as with List of Unicode characters (load time issues, esp. for wireless users)
No preference regarding underlining

Just my two cents. — xDanielx ^T/_C 04:50, 9 September 2007 (UTC)