ANOUNCING THE WINNER OF THE MG CODDING CHALLENGE

[Mark Balla]

Congratulation zen The winner of the MG coding challenge.

Here is the final vote tally

Morrie aka ALPHA: 8

jsz aka BRAVO: 1

yen aka CHARLIE: 7

zen aka DELTA: 10

Thank you to all the Members That Voted:

Morrie, i2dx, mballa, Khalid Ansari, kennoncotton, Mads, bsvingen, jaegen, dstudwell, Dan Press, bwgames, jhoskins, alukindo

SULLutions, didierj, PJM_labview, peteski, Urs Lauterburg, JoeLabview, jsz, yen, zen, jpdrolet, Mike Ashe, tcplomp, Michael_Aivaliotis, crelf

Special thanks to the Challenge Committee, Morre, jsz, yen, and zen for all their work.

[crelf]

Congratulation zen The winner of the MG coding challenge.

A big pat on the back to everyone who entered the challenge - I was pleasantly surprised with the inginuity and professionalism of all the entries - well done!

[Yair]

Congratulation, Zen (hey, nice name ) and thank you to the committee. I rather enjoyed that one.

A note to the committee, though. LAVA currently has over 5000 members listed. Even if we decide that over 90% of those members are inactive, I'm sure there are ways to get more than 26 people to vote (with several being the committee members and the submitters). I'm sure that some of this is because people did not have an LV version which was up to date enough, but I have a feeling that this is more because the challenge and the voting process were not published enough\appropriately.

A couple of suggestions for potential changes - decide on a maximum version (or backsave code if possible), allow people to vote even without seeing all the submissions (?) and PM all the members of LAVA once to let them know of the challenge and of the voting.

[zen]

Thank you to the committee, and also people voted for me

It was a great opportunity to code VI with focusing on my creativity, rather than pikky requests from customers/users.

I think one of the best way to learn programming is "reading" codes. Coding Challenges provides unique opportunities to read how other people create VI which functionality is the same as mine.

I am thinking about reviewing submitted codes. Probably in my blog or maybe posting to LAVA.

Zen

[jcz]

Like Bender from Futurama used to say: Aw, crap!

Not many people voted for my solution Anyway I am glad to be in this the finals, and I wait for more codding challenge

And thank you to all who organized this challenge.

jcz

[i2dx]

Congratulation, Zen

me, too!

A note to the committee, though. LAVA currently has over 5000 members listed. Even if we decide that over 90% of those members are inactive, I'm sure there are ways to get more than 26 people to vote

yea, I'm a little bit disapointed, too, that we could not motivate more members (except the CCC) to review the finalists and place a vote, but I don't have a really good idea, how to get this done?

Everyone is *somehow* a little bit lazy - except me, I am lazy like a bone - and I can in a way understand, that someone, who was not part of the challenge does not feel like looking through all submissions and reviewing it. Maybe, next time, we should pass on the public vote, and vote in the CCC instead?

[Ton Plomp]

Everyone is *somehow* a little bit lazy - except me, I am lazy like a bone - and I can in a way understand, that someone, who was not part of the challenge does not feel like looking through all submissions and reviewing it. Maybe, next time, we should pass on the public vote, and vote in the CCC instead?

Yep we're lazy, but I found the criteria somewhat difficult to test. You had to carefully read all related posts to find out what the code was supposed to return and the different implementations all had there side effects in the output. So I found it quite hard to 'judge' the entries. And the judging scheme was maybe a little overkill.

But I felt like I had to give something back (I know feedback is great) for these efforts!

What do you mean by public vote? I assume CCC is the message on the homepage.

Ton

[Jacemdom]

Yep we're lazy, but I found the criteria somewhat difficult to test. You had to carefully read all related posts to find out what the code was supposed to return and the different implementations all had there side effects in the output. So I found it quite hard to 'judge' the entries. And the judging scheme was maybe a little overkill.

But I felt like I had to give something back (I know feedback is great) for these efforts!

What do you mean by public vote? I assume CCC is the message on the homepage.

Ton

I downloaded some of the entries to evaluate them. After 5 minutes fiddling around i evaluated that i would have to invest much more time than 5 minutes to do a proper evaluation. In order to get more people to evaluate, it must be considered that they maybe did not even read about the challenge or what the goals and limitations were. It has to be clear and guide the evaluators from the beginning until the final evaluation.

[i2dx]

What do you mean by public vote? I assume CCC is the message on the homepage.

CCC means Coding Challenge Committee. We made the first review, then mark posted the "internal winners" for the public vote, where all members of LAVA were invited to choose their number one ...

After 5 minutes fiddling around i evaluated that i would have to invest much more time than 5 minutes to do a proper evaluation.

I think you've got the point. I took some time to do a propper evaluation, and not everyone is so much involved in the CC, that he/she wants to spend that time ...

cheers,

CB

[zen]

I am lazy, too. I found the most tedious part was to seek the top level VI made by others. People had hard time to find MY top level VI for sure. On the other hand, I think it is a good idea to review all candidate codes to be fair.

Here are my random thoughts.

• VI/file structure must follow some restriction so that valuators easily can find how to run easily.
  
• One big zip file contains five folders and each contains a candidate code. This prevent us from downloading one or two and give up evaluation.
  
• Voting allows us to gather as many eyes as possible. Meanwhile, Committee may give multiple credits because they have better eyes (this is just my assumption, not necessarily true).
  

Zen