Sorting a set of numbers based on what the user inputs?

Originally Posted by Adak

You have no idea what the OP has been exposed to in their programming education. You have no idea what environment he had, at that time. You have no idea what his educational foundation is, or it's history. You have no idea of what he did last week, will do today, or will do in the future, in programming.

You don't know. You don't have any idea of these facts. Your pontifications can not be made true, no matter how elegantly you rationalize them. You have no facts in this case, to base them upon.



Is that why so many programming books have answers to their problems or exercises, included in the book?

If a New Caledonian Crow can learn to use a tool by example, I am supremely confident that our forum members, can learn by example, as well.

No, I don't know about his educational foundation. But if any resource informs him he should try to program such a thing and the resource is anywhere near adequate, then the resource will have enough examples.

And in fact, I've seen very little books that have answers to the problems. And if they do, it is obvious that they should be used only as a last resort. The whole point is that books DO have exercises. Exactly because of my reasoning: just examples aren't enough.
And programming isn't "a tool". Programming contains brain-logic, a way of thinking (which can't be shown in examples), understanding language features, understanding syntax and a lot more.

We learn by example and by practice, clearly. All the rationalizing you can muster, won't change that.

It's an obvious truth.

People learn from examples sure, but people learn more from their own mistakes. Learning the right way do to something doesn't necessarily teach you as much as learning several wrong ways to do it first. Just ask Thomas Edison.
I'd have let the original poster make a few more mistakes first

Plus his original post was far from correct, and msh made no effort to actually explain where the original poster went wrong, or what techniques he had used to improve the code. Whilst it's entirely possible the original poster spent plenty of time going over the code given and learning from it, from the few posts by the OP, one cannot possibly tell that he didnt just copy the code given, and submit it, making no attempt to understand it at all.

msh's post was a solution dump, nothing more. Any argument to the contrary is based on assumed intentions of the original poster. Don't assume any such things on the net.
I stand by my earlier statement.

Originally Posted by iMalc

People learn from examples sure, but people learn more from their own mistakes. Learning the right way do to something doesn't necessarily teach you as much as learning several wrong ways to do it first. Just ask Thomas Edison.
I'd have let the original poster make a few more mistakes first

I would have as well, in this instance, but I'm not taking on the role of "optimum unpaid tutor on the net" for any forum member.

If the OP was a copy and paste plagerist, then he'll be the one to face his test grades, and his job interviews.

msh's post was a solution dump, nothing more.

You're 100% wrong on this one. Msh is new, he's just getting his feet wet, posting answers, and his post, as such, was about fitting in with us, and being accepted fully into the membership, as much as any snippet of code his post contained.

An overdone rebuke by three members, right in a row, was unwise, unnecessary, and entirely mistimed, however "correct" you felt it to be. Or have you decided to play moderator, optimum unpaid tutor, and micro-manager, all at the same time?

I stand by my earlier statement.

Which you would not do in a very public, forum, if you were thinking clearly on this matter. If you felt that it was absolutely necessary to berate Msh, why not do it in a PM, for heaven's sake?

Your stance for *OPTIMAL TUTORING* is thread bare. Nobody signed up for that role.

This is a C forum, he posted C code, with code tags, all relevant to the thread. His post was clear, concise, informative, and on-topic. That should be applauded, not harangued, by the members.

Okay, I take your point there. I've realised now that msh's post was probably in response to your first post rather than the original posters. This now thus make a bit more sense. He was perhaps unnecessarily explaining an optimial solution to you rather than the original poster, and thus may not have been indending to give the full solution directly to the OP. Of course you and I both know that you didn't need him to explain how to do it to yourself.
msh's post was then at best simply unnecessary, and yes it probably wasn't my place to publicly pull him up on this issue. Exaggeration doesn't work well on the net. I had no idea others would also feel the need to chip in, and really had no intention of going on about it, so this is my final note on this.
I too certainly applaud this poster for using code tags, I'm sure there are other posters who have posted over 50 times that still won't learn such things.

Having said all that, the rules are there for a reason, and one must rightly at least consider that the early posting of a fully working solution might not be the best thing to do, perhaps moreso in the case of more complex problems.

Adak... I never did insult msh and I don't expect anyone did want to offend him. I, for one, did not, but I did want him to know what he didn't wasn't the best thing to do. Especially after he claimed he didn't do anything wrong. That's called learning. I don't blame msh. He should just know, for in the future, that he should think twice before posting a solution.

And you keep claiming that we were bad as we seem to know what "optimal tutoring" is, in this case. Well, we don't, and we never claimed that we did. But it's kind of hypocrite of you. Because you are the one who pretty much claims to know what "optimal tutoring" is.
Let me explain. He's learning from a resource that decided to add an exercise somewhere. Apparently, the resource decided it was "optimal tutoring" to add that exercise. Was the resource wrong? Maybe, maybe not. But as I don't know, I assume the resource was correct. You, however, claim it isn't, as it's just as good according to you to read from example. So you claim, here, that your way of tutoring is equally good to whatever the learning resource decides. Even without having any idea what these resources are.
I simply assume that the resource was right to add an exercise there.

1) No one wants you (or anyone else), to be the judge of what you believe their tutoring skills are, for any poster. Judging the "best thing to do", when "tutoring" ?? -- listen to yourself!

2) Your "I'm on a tutoring mission from God" type of attitude, is inherently abrasive, and repugnant.

3) Tutoring skill judgments are not germane to the forum, very divisive, and ultimately destructive since they lead to endless bickering.

There is no objective conclusion possible.

I am not tutoring! I have two hard and fast rules in life: 1) I don't talk to imaginary people, and 2) I don't tutor people I don't know. I share a little C, learn a little C, and enjoy a bit of problem solving.

Originally Posted by Adak

I am not tutoring! I have two hard and fast rules in life: 1) I don't talk to imaginary people, and 2) I don't tutor people I don't know. I share a little C, learn a little C, and enjoy a bit of problem solving.

True, but you advocate - or at least support - Msh's way of tutoring, even though you have no idea what the course or whatever learning resource he's using is doing. I, in fact, am not supporting any way of tutoring, I'm opposed to changing the said learning resource without having any idea what this resource is.

3) Tutoring skill judgments are not germane to the forum, very divisive, and ultimately destructive since they lead to endless bickering.

Which is kind of my point. However, you support Msh judgement on changing the way of tutoring, which sounds to me like you claim to know The Way of tutoring.

I'm not per se against learning by example. But nobody on this forum was in any state of judging that this was a fair point to learn by example, especially when whatever book or course or tutorial he's using deemed it a good point to insert an assignment.

I am the one who's holding back from changing the way of tutoring, not you, so I am amazed that you can claim that I act as if I know everything about tutoring.

O_o

Wow. And Laserlight says I'm egocentric.

Soma

Originally Posted by phantomotap

O_o

Wow. And Laserlight says I'm egocentric.

Soma

Care to elaborate? I can think of many words that apply to both Adak and myself, but egocentric definitely isn't one of them.

No. (I am egocentric. I just like to poke fun at Laserlight.) It wouldn't be interesting. Just assume I'm right or wrong as you prefer and move on.

But for the sake of clarity, the original comment was aimed at Adak.

Soma

Originally Posted by phantomotap

No. (I am egocentric. I just like to poke fun at Laserlight.) It wouldn't be interesting. Just assume I'm right or wrong as you prefer and move on.

But for the sake of clarity, the original comment was aimed at Adak.

Soma

Well, if you claim someone to be egocentric and then don't elaborate... I have to agree with Laserlight :P.
Nah, I'm kidding of course. But I do think that insults should be elaborated; otherwise the insult is a mere display of weakness (or perhaps laziness).
I'm not trying to offend you. Or anyone, for that matter. At least not in this thread ;-).

*shrug*

I am extremely lazy.

He (Laserlight) has also called me "childish j..........**s" and "chillingly blunt". I've often thought of getting "chillingly blunt" tattooed on my forehead as an advanced warning system. You'll probably agree with those as well.

Oh, and I didn't say my comment was an insult. ^_^v

Soma

Originally Posted by phantomotap

*shrug*

I am extremely lazy.

He (Laserlight) has also called me "childish j..........**s" and "chillingly blunt". I've often thought of getting "chillingly blunt" tattooed on my forehead as an advanced warning system. You'll probably agree with those as well.

Oh, and I didn't say my comment was an insult. ^_^v

Soma

Actually, I've never thought any of those things about you. But I have to say, laserlight is wrong a hell of a lot of the time.

(As if we weren't enough off topic yet)

True, but you advocate - or at least support - Msh's way of tutoring, even though you have no idea what the course or whatever learning resource he's using is doing. I, in fact, am not supporting any way of tutoring, I'm opposed to changing the said learning resource without having any idea what this resource is.

I am advocating NOT tutoring. I favor exploring C, having fun with C, discovering how to make C work for you, etc.

<< WE ARE NOT TUTORS >>

Generally, rather helpful -- yes. Tutors, NO!