On Friday, September 9, 2016 at 6:25:38 PM UTC-7, kortschak wrote:
>
> Can you explain the rationale behind the classification of libraries as
> libraries or not libraries? It seems pretty arbitrary.
>
> (I'm interested from a sociological perspective, but not enough to
> bother to go to the benchmarks game discussion forum).
>
>From a sociological perspective:
mid-May, contributors of k-nucleotide programs that used a custom
written-for-k-nucleotide hash table were notified that those programs would
no longer be shown, but programs that used a built-in / library hash table
would be acceptable.
Within a few days, a couple of Rust contributors were discussing the
concerns they had about the performance of std::collections::HashMap but
reached an impasse. The lack of a Rust k-nucleotide program was mentioned a
couple of times in the following months.
A week ago, someone posted their idea for a possible implementation to a
Rust forum - it was discussed, improved, re-written and two different
programs contributed.
One person ("not a native English speaker") thought it was odd to allow:
import it.unimi.dsi.fastutil.longs.Long2IntOpenHashMap;
No one seems to have needed to discuss what was meant by library, like sascha
they seem to think they understood what was expected.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"golang-nuts" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to golang-nuts+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
