> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Date: Fri, 10 May 2002 13:50:25 +1000 > > PGAS should be designed so that it can take an arbitrary > number of divisions and with arbitrary names. These are > things we will definitely want to change in the future. > > Yet I think the most pressing need is for a "newbies" section > to allow the average (or below average) Perl programmer to > go on the stage without feeling humiliated.
An observation: Without handicaps, there would really only be one thing that kept Tiger Woods from entering and winning all the local club tournaments --- time. (Even with handicaps, he might still be able to win any non-Pro event he chose, but he might have to concentrate a bit. Chess masters get beaten by amateurs as well). Here, it's possible for a golfer with an analytical mindset and some amount of programming experience to shed their handicap in less than the week that a tournament takes. Handicapping is simply not viable, and I think the current beginners' board should be done away with. That leaves separate courses, like in track meets: Set up one for pros and one for newbies, and each competitor has to pick in advance (first time they submit) which they will golf. Better prizes on the pro hole, of course. (The veterans will probably golf the newbie course in the privacy of their flying saucers, but they won't be able to post the scores. Though if the newbie winner is of a sensitive disposition, they might have to stop reading the list during the post-mortem). I'm aware that having to make two courses is more work for the refs. Changes will be needed for PGAS, too --- I'll do the patch if there's interest. By the way, my calendar for the first week of June looks relatively sane. Can't have that... anybody need an assistant ref? Lars Mathiesen (U of Copenhagen CS Dep) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (Humour NOT marked)
