A MiniComp

Authoring General Design Discussions
1

I’m thinking of creating a comp called CodeComp. Basically, it’s a competition of authoring systems, not authors. You’ll need to code what the organizer says, in the least amount of code.

The Rules:

  1. Only one room is neccesary, unless the organizer says otherwise.
  2. GUI systems will still be counted by lines of code (Quest’s code view, but I don’t know about ADRIFT.)
  3. If one person has entered some code in the authoring system you were trying to do, you can enter.
  4. The starting code, i.e the general code present in all games will not be counted:

“Some Game” by Some Guy for I7, for example.

Why such a competition?

  1. So the lesser systems can get more popularity, and the bigger ones keep their positions.
  2. To aid in choosing a language (eg. I need to do X, so I’ll use system Y.)
2

ifwiki.org/index.php/TWIFcomp ?

3

Rule 2 seems a little unfair, where the user has no control over the code created. If you’re coding directly you would obviously write as concise as possible, whereas generated code is not going to do that.

4

I agree, and I think there would be no objective way to compare the “amount of code” between systems. After all, Inform 7 code is measured in words; others are measured in lines. Furthermore, two different coders can write exactly the same code but have different line counts because they have different coding styles. Some coders use separate lines for all code block characters; others do not. Some coders leave more comments. Most coders leave blank lines between object definitions, but they almost certainly don’t have to.

5

Rule 3 is silly.

6

If that is the aim I would suggest reading this thread, which seems to be generally accepted as a good idea but just needs someone to drive it forwards.

7

Yes.

8

I’d go so far to say it’s unnecessary and unfair. Why not see how two different coders can tackle the same problem with the same system?

syzygy

9

Writing the shortest possible program that does something is maybe a fun exercise if that’s your poison, but generally speaking I don’t think it’s a particularly good metric of how “good” the code is. It’s a measure of how short it is. Just saying.

Anyway, If you do go ahead with this I agree rule 3 is silly. What you should do is pick a winner for each system, that way coders using a particular system can compete against each other, but it will probably be easier to win a prize if you pick an obscure system.