[seqfan] Re: J-language.

[Olivier Gerard]

On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 12:50, Joerg Arndt <arndt at jjj.de> wrote:

>
> The 'code' section of our seqs is IMHO not a primary place of concern.
> I rarely find code that is incorrect (beyond repair).
> (There are places where code is IMHO bordering on obfuscation).
>

Please go on submitting other and better versions and have critical look at
any
sequences that catches your eye. I like to read your contributions.


> The lack of code (and sometimes even definition) in some
> (types of) seqs is worse.
>

You are welcome to submit some.


> There are other issues which I find more important,
> like unreflected use (1) or random invention of (2) terminology:
>
>
The improvement by fixes, comments, edits, code additions of the OEIS
can be undertaken by willing individuals at anytime while the selection of
entries
is a larger matter of policy which is best re-discussed after the wiki
version is running at its cruise-speed. Some points of terminology have
recently been precised on this list, some exotic terminology is inevitable
especially when isolated contributors cannot ask for references.

Please encourage them to subscribe to seqfan so that they can ask
whether their concept is already known. You can also ask on their
behalf and put them in copy so that you can improve the entry
collaboratively.
And please be very kind to them on this list when replying to such enquiries
as this list is also meant as a permanent learning forum.

Joerg, I expect you not to bring point (1) again until the working
conditions
and organization of the OEIS have changed significantly.

Regards,

Olivier