Update config.json to match new specification about common-lisp HOT 8 CLOSED

Done with PR #123

from common-lisp.

I'd suggest re-opening this since the exercises currently have a difficulty of 1 and the empty list for topics.

from common-lisp.

Ah someone is watching!

Hmm we could either keep this issue open or have separate issues for difficulty levels & topics.

Hmm... I'll re-open this issue - we can spawn further issues if it seems like a good idea.

from common-lisp.

BTW @yurrriq do you have any suggestions for topics and/or difficulty levels?

from common-lisp.

Couple of quick takes.

1. Topics is basically a tagging problem, so we'll need some set of tags to use and identify which one's are appropriate for the exercise. I had the idea that we could tag roughly around the chapters of the Common Lisp Hyperspec where we might expect people to look up things for this exercise. For example, hamming we generally expect people to look up stuff in "Iteration", "Sequences", "Strings", "Characters". For leap, "Data and Control Flow", and "Numbers". For gigasecond, "Environment" and "Data and Control Flow".

2. Difficulty is a ranking problem, but it seems like there are a couple of axes to consider. One is the number of possible solutions we might consider well-formed, and reasonable. For hamming there's a lot of these. For leap there's just two with minor variations, same with gigasecond. Another axis might be the complexity of the different acceptable solutions--that seems like it would track pretty closely to how many iterations, and how much feedback before a student might need before arriving at a decent solution. Lastly there's the question of the "pedagogical intent" with each exercise, which certainly is something that should be reflected in the topics. For example grains and difference-of-squares are basically math problems, compare with gigasecond and space-age which are also math problems, even simpler ones, but one requires learning about CL's time functions and the other is an exercise in first-class function defining.

That's it for now.

from common-lisp.

re: #1 - I think part of the idea of this topics thing is to have topics that span all of exercism along with some that are specific to tracks. So while I sort of like your idea, we can't use CLHS chapters exclusively.

re: #2 - I find that for some of our exercises there are plenty of 'right' ways to solve something. For example you can use recursion or do expressions or loop or map etc. None of them are more right than others and we can discuss their pros and cons. But at their core these exercises (/e.g./ hamming) are actually rather simple. I don't want to have the number of possible solutions to inflate their rank. Perhaps we look at the number of topics involved and some weighting of how 'advanced' some of those topics are to determine a ranking. space-age would be higher rank because it involves procedural functional definition which is more 'advanced' that simple math or even the date/time API.

I think we need to come up with some reasonable but arbitrary ranking and then have a discussion about it, shifting them about a little and then calling it a day. This sort of discussion could go on /ad infinitum/ and we'll have no result. I don't see much harm in setting down some "random" numbers so we can have a more directed discussion.

Maybe we should split the topics & ranking into separate issues and deal with them as such. They are not directly related and we could have topics without ranking and /visa versa/.

from common-lisp.

@exercism/lisp Anyone have any suggestions for topics & difficulty level for the xlisp track?

from common-lisp.

I know there was some discussion on this issue but I am going to close it in favor of #142 & #143. (This issue is tagged on exercism/discussions#60.)

from common-lisp.