FYI: rosetta code

[seriousme]

Maybe I'm stating the obvious, but just to be sure: Rosetta Code currently hosts 879 "programming tasks" in 697 languages.

Cheers,
Hans

[june128]

Can you go in more detail about what you want to attack with this issue?

[Gathros]

Rosetta Code is focus is on languages and their differences which the archive is about the algorithms. Also the licencing on the code from Rosetta Code means you have to reference them when you use their code, we don't have that issue (if you want to call it an issue).

[seriousme]

No offence, I was just trying be helpful. The arguments from @Gathros make sense to me. It might be an idea to create a FAQ.md and list these arguments there so people know why to choose one over another.

[Gathros]

I understand, its just your comment made no sense; all you said was rosetta code and that's it. I guess you were trying to say the AAA is just another rosetta code. I think you should edit the title to give more explanation on what you mean if it's not that.

[seriousme]

To be honest, I see so many people reinventing the wheel on the internet just because they don't know what's already out there. Hence my attempt to tell this community that other sites actually exist and my disclaimer that you might already be fully aware, which you obviously are. I've edited the title and will close the issue here. Good luck with the project !

[june128]

@seriousme Thanks for the friendly help tho.

[june128]

I've created an FAQ entry regarding the difference: https://github.com/algorithm-archivists/algorithm-archive/wiki/FAQ#whats-the-difference-to-rosetta-code

[leios]

@seriousme Sorry I am late to the thread (and it's already been closed). If anything, the Algorithm Archive is closer to Numerical Recipes than Rosetta Code. I am fully aware both of these projects exist and are similar in scope to the Algorithm Archive; however, we are providing something new here that no other project provides (so far as I'm aware).

Differences from Rosetta Code:

1. This is fundamentally a book on algorithms, focusing on understanding the underlying algorithms. The goal here is to provide a reading experience that allows users to fully implement and understand every algorithm from the ground-up in the language of their choice. It is definitely not a collection of tasks for the community to complete.
2. The implementations provided here are also meant for understanding and we will always try to only merge code that can be understood completely. Sure, we are lacking the power to review certain languages, but I have no doubt people will come in to do just that.
3. We have the goal of providing a full curriculum for different areas of computer science, mathematics, physics, etc. This would mean that anyone wanting to learn the ropes in computational physics (for example) can read our volume on computational physics, and they should be able to fully understand that area of research.

Differences from Numerical Recipes:

1. First and foremost, our licensing for the code snippets is actually somewhat sane.
2. This text (in principle) has both a broader scope and expects less background knowledge from the reader. Obviously, we are not there yet on either of those goals, but I are doing what I can to get there.
3. This text is also (in principle) more of a modern take on the algorithms. Though NR has obviously been updated since 1986, it is showing it's age.

To be clear: I am not against either project. They are both wonderful resources. This book is targeted at a fundamentally different audience than NR (We want people who would watch a youtube video and think, "Oh man. I want to do that!" -- basically hobby programmers), but also attempts to provide clear descriptions of the algorithms so people don't need to collate papers and resources from other places.

The tagline, "A book on every algorithm in existence in every language possible" is not incorrect. I am sure with time it will become more obvious what the differences are because we are only just now getting started.

Let me know if you have any further questions here. I know that the scope seems similar in nature, but I can assure you we looked at Rosetta Code before starting this project.

[jiegillet]

I want to add that re-inventing the wheel is sometimes super fun and a good learning moment. Also, very rarely, the wheels ends up being perfected, so why not.