Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!think.com!mintaka!bloom-beacon!eru!hagbard!sunic!mcsun!hp4nl!star.cs.vu.nl!raymond From: raymond@cs.vu.nl (Raymond Michiels) Newsgroups: comp.org.acm Subject: Re: Programming languages/different machines in contests Message-ID: <9965@star.cs.vu.nl> Date: 15 May 91 15:16:00 GMT References: <6X3B-PB@xds13.ferranti.com> <1494@caslon.cs.arizona.edu> <1991May9.010805.21605@mcs.kent.edu> <1991May12.213538.1544@agate.berkeley.edu> Sender: news@cs.vu.nl Lines: 33 rang@cs.wisc.edu (Anton Rang) writes: >In article <1991May12.213538.1544@agate.berkeley.edu> dwallach@soda.berkeley.edu (Dan Wallach) writes: >>I'd like to bring up a different topic with regard to contests: should >>they always be on PC's? > I don't see any real reason why they should or shouldn't be, except >that a bunch of PCs is probably easiest to set up. This year's finals were on AT&T WGS-6386 (386 based) workstations which were connected to the jury's computer by a network. All submissions were done using the network. This really works much better than running around with floppies. >It seemed to work better than the PC-based contests I've been at, simply >because of the electronic submission capabilities, and because >compiles and prints both ran at very reasonable speeds. Even though a 386 is often used as a PC, we too had the e-mail capabilities, we each had our own printer and the compilation speed of a 25 MHz 386 is reasonable. (VERY reasonable, in my opinion.) The biggest advantage, however, is that we didn't have to use MS-DOS. >>For college contests, however, workstations would be lots nicer [ ... ] > Yes, I think it would be possible to run a contest with some sort of >workstation (say, a net of diskless Sun 3/50s). Just like the finals! -Raymond. PS: Why my enthusiasm about the finals? We came in second!