Re: Idea for a process experiment to reward running code...

"Martin J. Dürst" <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp> Tue, 04 December 2012 05:47 UTC

Return-Path: <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8831C21F8986 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 3 Dec 2012 21:47:22 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -100.278
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-100.278 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.488, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_JP=1.244, HOST_EQ_JP=1.265, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id wLHvE-Leo5a7 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 3 Dec 2012 21:47:22 -0800 (PST)
Received: from scintmta01.scbb.aoyama.ac.jp (scintmta01.scbb.aoyama.ac.jp [133.2.253.33]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C412921F8987 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Mon, 3 Dec 2012 21:47:21 -0800 (PST)
Received: from scmse01.scbb.aoyama.ac.jp ([133.2.253.231]) by scintmta01.scbb.aoyama.ac.jp (secret/secret) with SMTP id qB45lGrN029570 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 4 Dec 2012 14:47:16 +0900
Received: from (unknown [133.2.206.133]) by scmse01.scbb.aoyama.ac.jp with smtp id 1ef2_95b7_0f18bea4_3dd6_11e2_9bf7_001d096c566a; Tue, 04 Dec 2012 14:47:15 +0900
Received: from [IPv6:::1] ([133.2.210.1]:56268) by itmail.it.aoyama.ac.jp with [XMail 1.22 ESMTP Server] id <S161B8DF> for <ietf@ietf.org> from <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>; Tue, 4 Dec 2012 14:47:16 +0900
Message-ID: <50BD8E60.5030206@it.aoyama.ac.jp>
Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2012 14:47:12 +0900
From: =?UTF-8?B?Ik1hcnRpbiBKLiBEw7xyc3Qi?= <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>
Organization: Aoyama Gakuin University
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1.9) Gecko/20100722 Eudora/3.0.4
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Elwyn Davies <elwynd@dial.pipex.com>
Subject: Re: Idea for a process experiment to reward running code...
References: <50BA64AB.3010106@cs.tcd.ie> <50BC401C.8020101@it.aoyama.ac.jp> <50BC86B7.1010706@gmail.com> <1354545525.11916.744.camel@mightyatom>
In-Reply-To: <1354545525.11916.744.camel@mightyatom>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: IETF-Discussion <ietf@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2012 05:47:22 -0000

On 2012/12/03 23:38, Elwyn Davies wrote:

> Given that there is also open source code, reviewers have the chance to
> take a look at that and see the degree of hackiness involved.

Well, yes. It's easy enough to evaluate stuff such as non-descriptive 
variable names, messy indenting, and weird comments.

But there's a catch here: There are so many programming languages that 
it's very well possible that the code is written in a language you don't 
understand. It may be using techniques that are totally accepted for 
that specific language, but in a way that is considered very hacky in 
the relevant community. Or something else. As an outsider, you may have 
no way to evaluate that.

Specs are in English (also a problem for some people, but I hope we can 
leave that to another thread :-), which is at least a single target.

Regards,   Martin.