I agree. The judging would focus on what's happening in "core" with an eye for ingenuity, exploitation of the architecture, speed... With a high level language (especially across multiple platforms) the compiler (and more significantly, the libraries) are responsible for all of that. A virtual machine such as Java makes all of this even more nebulous. With audiences having few people with assembly language prowess (i.e. lots of people with little-or-no assembly language experience) a good alternative would be a "programming contest" using a single language (or a limited number of "similar" languages) where judging can be based on correctness, software design, programming-team-time, and, yes, even execution time.
On Fri, 10 Oct 2003 8:17:27pm, Donald J. Bindner wrote: > >I think the point is specifically that we don't want a high level >language. No one wants to claim ultimate superiority in Lisp >wars or Modula 2 wars; or given our recent thread Cobol wars. >The whole point of core wars is the crudeness, that sense of >getting down to the nitty gritty. If you can be clever in that >context, you can count yourself clever. > >Don > >-- >Don Bindner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >
----------------------------------------------------------------- To get off this list, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with Subject: unsubscribe -----------------------------------------------------------------
