Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.python > #25856 > unrolled thread

Gender, Representativeness and Reputation in StackOverflow

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.python

Contents

  Gender, Representativeness and Reputation in StackOverflow Alexander Serebrenik <A.Serebrenik@tue.nl> - 2012-07-23 05:51 -0700
    Re: Gender, Representativeness and Reputation in StackOverflow Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2012-07-23 17:44 -0400
      Re: Gender, Representativeness and Reputation in StackOverflow Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2012-07-24 01:30 +0000
        Re: Gender, Representativeness and Reputation in StackOverflow Devin Jeanpierre <jeanpierreda@gmail.com> - 2012-07-23 22:51 -0400
          Freedom and Data (was Gender, Representativeness and Reputation in StackOverflow) rusi <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2012-07-23 20:56 -0700
            Re: Freedom and Data (was Gender, Representativeness and Reputation in StackOverflow) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2012-07-24 14:28 +1000
              Re: Freedom and Data (was Gender, Representativeness and Reputation in StackOverflow) rusi <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2012-07-23 22:26 -0700
          Re: Gender, Representativeness and Reputation in StackOverflow Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2012-07-24 05:34 +0000
            Re: Gender, Representativeness and Reputation in StackOverflow rusi <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2012-07-23 22:56 -0700
              Re: Gender, Representativeness and Reputation in StackOverflow Alexander Serebrenik <A.Serebrenik@tue.nl> - 2012-07-24 00:26 -0700
              Re: Gender, Representativeness and Reputation in StackOverflow Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2012-07-24 08:33 +0000
        Re: Gender, Representativeness and Reputation in StackOverflow Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2012-07-24 14:19 +1000
    Re: Re: Gender, Representativeness and Reputation in StackOverflow Evan Driscoll <driscoll@cs.wisc.edu> - 2012-07-23 17:01 -0500
    Re: Gender, Representativeness and Reputation in StackOverflow Ethan Furman <ethan@stoneleaf.us> - 2012-07-23 15:09 -0700
      Re: Gender, Representativeness and Reputation in StackOverflow Alexander Serebrenik <A.Serebrenik@tue.nl> - 2012-07-23 15:14 -0700
        Re: Gender, Representativeness and Reputation in StackOverflow Gene Heskett <gheskett@wdtv.com> - 2012-07-23 20:01 -0400
      Re: Gender, Representativeness and Reputation in StackOverflow Alexander Serebrenik <A.Serebrenik@tue.nl> - 2012-07-23 15:14 -0700
    Re: Gender, Representativeness and Reputation in StackOverflow Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2012-07-23 18:14 -0400

#25856 — Gender, Representativeness and Reputation in StackOverflow

Do you participate in StackOverflow discussions? 

As a part of a joint on-going research effort of the Brunel University (UK) and Eindhoven University of Technology (The Netherlands)  on the impact of collaboration sites on the developers community, we would like to understand the demographics of StackOverflow participants and their activity. Specifically we are focusing on how genders, minorities and cultural background are represented in the population of users and participants of StackOverflow. 

Therefore, we have prepared a small questionnaire: 
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/viewform?formkey=dEhtUVNQTEJmRTlwMVJSQ1hkeUZTR3c6MQ#gid=0 

In our previous research we have proposed an h-index for open source developers (http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=%22Developing+an+h-index+for+OSS+developers.%22), and we have a paper under review about how web activity (also Stack Overflow's) could be used by candidates as their resumes. 

Filling this questionnaire should not take more than a couple of minutes. Personal data will not be made available to third parties and no identifiable details about individual participants will be published. 


Best regards, 
Andrea Capiluppi (andrea.capiluppi @ brunel.ac.uk) [Lecturer, Brunel University, UK; NL; SO userid: 1528556] 
Alexander Serebrenik (a.serebrenik @ tue.nl)  [Assistant Professor, Eindhoven University of Technology, NL; SO userid: 1277111] 
Bogdan Vasilescu (b.n.vasilescu @ tue.nl) [PhD student, Eindhoven University of Technology, NL; SO userid: 1285620] 

Discussion of this survey on Meta Stack Overflow: http://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/139901/gender-representativeness-and-reputation-in-stackoverflow 

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#25929

On 7/23/2012 8:51 AM, Alexander Serebrenik wrote:
> Do you participate in StackOverflow discussions?
>
> As a part of a joint on-going research effort of the Brunel
> University (UK) and Eindhoven University of Technology (The
> Netherlands)  on the impact of collaboration sites on the developers
> community, we would like to understand the demographics of
> StackOverflow participants and their activity. Specifically we are
> focusing on how genders, minorities and cultural background are
> represented in the population of users and participants of
> StackOverflow.

StackOverflow is open to anyone in the world who can write and read 
English. Aside from political interference and language problems, the 
other factors should be mostly irrelevant.

> Therefore, we have prepared a small questionnaire:
> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/viewform?formkey=dEhtUVNQTEJmRTlwMVJSQ1hkeUZTR3c6MQ#gid=0

The scientific value of self-selected respondents is pretty low.

>  In our previous research we have proposed an h-index for open source
> developers
> (http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=%22Developing+an+h-index+for+OSS+developers.%22),

This is a deceptive and time-wasting link. It only says ...

Abstract The public data available in Open Source Software (OSS) 
repositories has been used for many practical reasons: detecting 
community structures; identifying key roles among developers; 
understanding software quality; predicting the arousal of bugs in large ...

which is not even the first sentence of the abstract. I still have no 
idea what 'h' means.

The actual link is
http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/login.jsp?tp=&arnumber=6224288&url=http%3A%2F%2Fieeexplore.ieee.org%2Fxpls%2Fabs_all.jsp%3Farnumber%3D6224288

and the cost to read is $31 as part of a large conference proceedings 
book. (Apparently, members can read the 4 pages for free.)

Leaving aside the point that this is not directly related to Python, my 
opinion is that if the authors will not make past and future papers 
freely available, not even an abstract, they should not ask for valuable 
free data from freely donated time.

-- 
Terry Jan Reedy

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#25944

On Mon, 23 Jul 2012 17:44:27 -0400, Terry Reedy wrote:

> On 7/23/2012 8:51 AM, Alexander Serebrenik wrote:
>> Do you participate in StackOverflow discussions?
>>
>> As a part of a joint on-going research effort of the Brunel University
>> (UK) and Eindhoven University of Technology (The Netherlands)  on the
>> impact of collaboration sites on the developers community, we would
>> like to understand the demographics of StackOverflow participants and
>> their activity. Specifically we are focusing on how genders, minorities
>> and cultural background are represented in the population of users and
>> participants of StackOverflow.
> 
> StackOverflow is open to anyone in the world who can write and read
> English. Aside from political interference and language problems, the
> other factors should be mostly irrelevant.

Should be irrelevant. But how do you know that they are irrelevant unless 
you check? By intuition?

If you don't measure, how do you know? Do you really mean to suggest that 
your intuition that sexism and racism have no effect on the reputation of 
StackOverflow participants is so infallible that it's not worth doing a 
study to find out?


>> Therefore, we have prepared a small questionnaire:
>> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/viewform?
formkey=dEhtUVNQTEJmRTlwMVJSQ1hkeUZTR3c6MQ#gid=0
> 
> The scientific value of self-selected respondents is pretty low.

Not necessarily. But you would need to check how the researchers account 
for the bias to tell.


[...]
> Leaving aside the point that this is not directly related to Python, my
> opinion is that if the authors will not make past and future papers
> freely available, not even an abstract, they should not ask for valuable
> free data from freely donated time.

Well of course it is your time and your judgement to make, but in my 
opinion even non-free scientific knowledge is better than ignorance.



-- 
Steven

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#25945

On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 9:30 PM, Steven D'Aprano
<steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> wrote:
>> Leaving aside the point that this is not directly related to Python, my
>> opinion is that if the authors will not make past and future papers
>> freely available, not even an abstract, they should not ask for valuable
>> free data from freely donated time.
>
> Well of course it is your time and your judgement to make, but in my
> opinion even non-free scientific knowledge is better than ignorance.

When people boycott a product, it isn't because not having the product
is better than having the product. That's clearly untrue: despite the
reasons for the boycott, the product has some value. They boycott it
because by doing so, they can get something better than <product with
badness> or <nothing> -- they can get <product without badness>. (At
least, in theory :)

Why settle for a terrible situation, when we could be encouraging
people to do better?

/me has been paying too much attention to the Elsevier boycott

-- Devin

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#25947 — Freedom and Data (was Gender, Representativeness and Reputation in StackOverflow)

On Jul 24, 7:51 am, Devin Jeanpierre <jeanpierr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 9:30 PM, Steven D'Aprano
>
> <steve+comp.lang.pyt...@pearwood.info> wrote:
> >> Leaving aside the point that this is not directly related to Python, my
> >> opinion is that if the authors will not make past and future papers
> >> freely available, not even an abstract, they should not ask for valuable
> >> free data from freely donated time.
>
> > Well of course it is your time and your judgement to make, but in my
> > opinion even non-free scientific knowledge is better than ignorance.
>
> When people boycott a product, it isn't because not having the product
> is better than having the product. That's clearly untrue: despite the
> reasons for the boycott, the product has some value. They boycott it
> because by doing so, they can get something better than <product with
> badness> or <nothing> -- they can get <product without badness>. (At
> least, in theory :)


The world in which we live (and this list's subject in particular)
would not exist without the
idealism of people like rms, linus and specifically GvR.  And yet too
much misguided idealism defeats its own cause.  Specifically I believe
that rms has lost relevance because he's overspent his unquestionable
technical prowess too much on political agendas.

In the age of 'cloud computing,' Tim O'Reilly's  stance on data is
particularly relevant in this (kind of) discussions:

"The market, in short, is no longer for software, open source or
proprietary. Tomorrow's market is all about data."
from http://news.cnet.com/8301-13505_3-10264471-16.html

And

I have a simple test that I use in my talks to see if my audience of
computer industry professionals is thinking with the old paradigm or
the new. "How many of you use Linux?" I ask. Depending on the venue,
20-80% of the audience might raise its hands. "How many of you use
Google?" Every hand in the room goes up. And the light begins to dawn.
Every one of them uses Google's massive complex of 100,000 Linux
servers, but they were blinded to the answer by a mindset in which
"the software you use" is defined as the software running on the
computer in front of you. Most of the "killer apps" of the Internet,
applications used by hundreds of millions of people, run on Linux or
FreeBSD. But the operating system, as formerly defined, is to these
applications only a component of a larger system. Their true platform
is the Internet.
from http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/oreilly/tim/articles/paradigmshift_0504.html

> Why settle for a terrible situation, when we could be encouraging
> people to do better?

Because there could be non-trivial costs to doing that
'encouragement?'

>
> /me has been paying too much attention to the Elsevier boycott
>
> -- Devin

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#25948 — Re: Freedom and Data (was Gender, Representativeness and Reputation in StackOverflow)

On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 1:56 PM, rusi <rustompmody@gmail.com> wrote:
> "How many of you use Linux?" I ask.

The awkwardness is in the definition of the question. Many of the
products that I buy will have, at some point, been carried by a truck,
but I would answer "No" if someone asked me if I use a truck. Would
you say that you "use", say, Windows 2000? Do you even *know* if any
of the web sites you use are built on it? What about Cisco Router,
Model <insert product identifier>? I personally have no idea what
networking hardware my ISPs use, nor should I care.

When I do a Google search, I don't "use" their Linux; I use only the
TCP/IP socket connection. If they were to rip out Linux tomorrow and
put in a perfect replacement that they wrote in-house, I wouldn't know
and, to be honest, wouldn't care. In the same way, they don't care if
I write my own web server; they'll crawl the documents just the same.
Doesn't mean they "use" my custom web server, and certainly doesn't
mean that everyone who does a search that's affected by my content has
"used" that server.

> Their true platform is the Internet.

Indeed it is. Operating system means nothing; IP transmissions mean
everything. Your platform is a TCP socket (or, less commonly, a stream
of UDP or other packets).

ChrisA

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#25950 — Re: Freedom and Data (was Gender, Representativeness and Reputation in StackOverflow)

On Jul 24, 9:28 am, Chris Angelico <ros...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 1:56 PM, rusi <rustompm...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > "How many of you use Linux?" I ask.
>
> The awkwardness is in the definition of the question. Many of the
> products that I buy will have, at some point, been carried by a truck,
> but I would answer "No" if someone asked me if I use a truck. Would
> you say that you "use", say, Windows 2000? Do you even *know* if any
> of the web sites you use are built on it? What about Cisco Router,
> Model <insert product identifier>? I personally have no idea what
> networking hardware my ISPs use, nor should I care.
>
> When I do a Google search, I don't "use" their Linux; I use only the
> TCP/IP socket connection. If they were to rip out Linux tomorrow and
> put in a perfect replacement that they wrote in-house, I wouldn't know
> and, to be honest, wouldn't care. In the same way, they don't care if
> I write my own web server; they'll crawl the documents just the same.
> Doesn't mean they "use" my custom web server, and certainly doesn't
> mean that everyone who does a search that's affected by my content has
> "used" that server.
>
> > Their true platform is the Internet.
>
> Indeed it is. Operating system means nothing; IP transmissions mean
> everything. Your platform is a TCP socket (or, less commonly, a stream
> of UDP or other packets).
>
> ChrisA

You make it sound very clear cut.
I see more mess (maybe I am messy?)

People use cars.
That simple car-use implies the use of petrol and the atmosphere.
Multiply that by the billions that use cars and we have a global-
warming problem.

Likewise google.
Google uses the freely developed
- linux
- the gnu ecosystem
- html/http-web
- TCP/IP stack


Would google be where it is without these?
Sure google is also giving back. How much is genuine and how much is
PR?

No intention to ask rhetorical questions.  Each one of us at each
point needs to ask:
Shall I stick my neck out or just get on with my business?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#25951

On Mon, 23 Jul 2012 22:51:07 -0400, Devin Jeanpierre wrote:

> On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 9:30 PM, Steven D'Aprano
> <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> wrote:
>>> Leaving aside the point that this is not directly related to Python,
>>> my opinion is that if the authors will not make past and future papers
>>> freely available, not even an abstract, they should not ask for
>>> valuable free data from freely donated time.
>>
>> Well of course it is your time and your judgement to make, but in my
>> opinion even non-free scientific knowledge is better than ignorance.
> 
> When people boycott a product, it isn't because not having the product
> is better than having the product. That's clearly untrue: despite the
> reasons for the boycott, the product has some value. They boycott it
> because by doing so, they can get something better than <product with
> badness> or <nothing> -- they can get <product without badness>. (At
> least, in theory :)

I don't think that's why people boycott products. I think that boycotts 
are a clear example of people making a moral decision to punish somebody 
for doing wrong, even at the cost to themselves. Sometimes significant 
costs, as in missing out altogether.

We don't say, except in jest, "I needed to get gas for my car, but Acme 
Fuels were 2 cents more expensive than CQ Petroleum, so I boycotted Acme 
and bought from CQ." No, a boycott is more like "I think Acme Fuels are 
unethical and immoral, and so I am boycotting them until they change 
their behaviour, even though they are cheaper than CQ Petroleum."

Or, "Nectarine Computers are doing bad things in China, so I will never 
by an Nectarine ePod or eCommunicator even though I think the other 
brands aren't worth having."

In short, boycotts aren't merely an attempt to get a better deal. There 
is a strong element of moral outrage and punishment of a transgressor to 
boycotts. "You have broken a social contract, so we will ostracize you in 
whatever way we can, even if that means losing the benefits you can 
provide."


> Why settle for a terrible situation, when we could be encouraging people
> to do better?

I am sympathetic to the view that closed science is not real science, and 
that it is "cheating" in some sense. But I think it is a grey area where 
the practitioners should be cut some slack, rather than a clear case of 
unethical behaviour. After all, even patents eventually expire, and even 
closed journals don't prevent knowledge from leaking out into the wider 
scientific community and hence into the general community.


-- 
Steven

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#25954

> On Mon, 23 Jul 2012 22:51:07 -0400, Devin Jeanpierre wrote:
> > When people boycott a product, it isn't because not having the product
> > is better than having the product. That's clearly untrue: despite the
> > reasons for the boycott, the product has some value. They boycott it
> > because by doing so, they can get something better than <product with
> > badness> or <nothing> -- they can get <product without badness>. (At
> > least, in theory :)
>

On Jul 24, 10:34 am, Steven D'Aprano <steve
+comp.lang.pyt...@pearwood.info> wrote:
> I don't think that's why people boycott products. I think that boycotts
> are a clear example of people making a moral decision to punish somebody
> for doing wrong, even at the cost to themselves. Sometimes significant
> costs, as in missing out altogether.
>

I dont see so much difference -- maybe you missed the 'badness' in
Devin's quote?

People who lose family, get jailed, blown-up etc for causes they
believe in, have the equation (at least in their value-system) that
the 'badness' is enough that these eventualities are acceptable.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#25958

As a scientist I would be more than happy to publish in Open-Access Journals rather than in IEEE/ACM/Springer-published ones. However, I also have to be sure that my publications reach the scientific community and make an impact on it. Unfortunately, in many fields AFAIK the better journals (= higher impact, etc) are access-restricted, while the open-access ones are overloaded by low-quality submissions and are no much better than a trash bin.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#25967

On Mon, 23 Jul 2012 22:56:42 -0700, rusi wrote:

>> On Mon, 23 Jul 2012 22:51:07 -0400, Devin Jeanpierre wrote:
>> > When people boycott a product, it isn't because not having the
>> > product is better than having the product. That's clearly untrue:
>> > despite the reasons for the boycott, the product has some value. They
>> > boycott it because by doing so, they can get something better than
>> > <product with badness> or <nothing> -- they can get <product without
>> > badness>. (At least, in theory :)
>>
>>
> On Jul 24, 10:34 am, Steven D'Aprano <steve
> +comp.lang.pyt...@pearwood.info> wrote:
>> I don't think that's why people boycott products. I think that boycotts
>> are a clear example of people making a moral decision to punish
>> somebody for doing wrong, even at the cost to themselves. Sometimes
>> significant costs, as in missing out altogether.
>>
>>
> I dont see so much difference -- maybe you missed the 'badness' in
> Devin's quote?

No, I saw it. The difference is that I read Devin as suggesting that 
people are motivated by a sense of "I want to get Product X, without the 
badness", which implies that the primary driving force is "get Product 
X", rather than "avoid badness". In a sense, Devin suggests that boycotts 
are a form of bargaining: give us a better product by reducing the 
badness, and we'll buy. (Whether Devin *intended* this implication is 
another question.)

I'm suggesting that the primary motivation is "this company is doing bad, 
I wish to punish them by withholding my purchases, even to my own 
detriment". I'm suggesting that, at least to some degree, people are 
*not* bargaining for better products when they engage in a boycott. They 
are punishing a cheater, and to some degree they may never quite forgive 
and forget.

I can't speak for others, but 30(?) years later, I still sometimes 
consciously forgo buying Nestle products because of their unethical 
promotion of expensive baby formula at the expense of breast-feeding in 
Africa. As time goes by, this urge becomes weaker, but it never quite 
goes away.

A more relevant example might be the way many people in the FOSS 
community do not and will not forgive Microsoft for their bad behaviour 
in the past, even now that they have mostly, and reluctantly, accepted 
that they have to coexist with Linux.

Or this: http://xkcd.com/1057/

Of course, people are complex and their motivations can be a tangled web 
of contradictory and complimentary urges. But "punish the cheater" is an 
extremely powerful motivation in human beings.


-- 
Steven

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#25990

On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 12:51 PM, Devin Jeanpierre
<jeanpierreda@gmail.com> wrote:
> When people boycott a product, it isn't because not having the product
> is better than having the product. That's clearly untrue: despite the
> reasons for the boycott, the product has some value.

That's because you don't call it boycotting when the product has no
value. I'm not in the habit of purchasing used cigarette ash, and I
suspect you're not buying any either, but that's not a boycott.

ChrisA

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#25933

On 01/-10/-28163 01:59 PM, Terry Reedy wrote:
> This is a deceptive and time-wasting link....
>
> Leaving aside the point that this is not directly related to Python, my
> opinion is that if the authors will not make past and future papers
> freely available, not even an abstract, they should not ask for valuable
> free data from freely donated time.

Leaving aside questions of relevance to the email list and the quality 
of results from a self-selected survey, the PDF is linked directly from 
the Google Scholar link in the original post: "[PDF] from tue.nl".

Evan

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#25934

Terry Reedy wrote:
> Leaving aside the point that this is not directly related to Python, my 
> opinion is that if the authors will not make past and future papers 
> freely available, not even an abstract, they should not ask for valuable 
> free data from freely donated time.

Thanks, Terry!  Save me some valuable time.

~Ethan~

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#25935

1) The paper referenced contains 4 pages, so it should be available via IEEXplore. Moreover, you can find a copy on http://www.win.tue.nl/~aserebre/MSR2012.pdf

2) Since the survey is only one of the techniques we intend to use, and it will be augmented by analysing the data publicly available in the SE dump, I believe the selection bias is appropriately addressed.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#25938

On Monday 23 July 2012 19:42:29 Alexander Serebrenik did opine:

> 1) The paper referenced contains 4 pages, so it should be available via
> IEEXplore. Moreover, you can find a copy on
> http://www.win.tue.nl/~aserebre/MSR2012.pdf
> 
> 2) Since the survey is only one of the techniques we intend to use, and
> it will be augmented by analysing the data publicly available in the SE
> dump, I believe the selection bias is appropriately addressed.

I think you are missing the point, Alexander.  From my limited reading here 
as I lurk, you seem to taking freely available data and putting it behind 
the infamous IEEE paywall.  If that isn't the case, I apologize.  That sort 
of thing will always tend to chase the folks who could probably make the 
best use of it, away.

I could well be full of it, but that is how this now old man who has been 
chasing electrons and making them do work useful for me and my employers 
for the last 62 years, sees and tastes my experiences with IEEE.  Its a bad 
taste in my mouth every time we meet.

If you think I'm kidding about the years above, I had fingerprints on the 
pcb's of the two tv cameras that were on the Trieste when it, Lt. Walsh and 
Jacques Cousteau  went down into the mohole in Feb. 1960.

That, and $1.32 will get you a 16 oz cup of coffee to go at my local 7-11. 
:)

Cheers, Gene
-- 
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
 soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
My web page: <http://coyoteden.dyndns-free.com:85/gene> is up!
Faster, faster, you fool, you fool!
		-- Bill Cosby

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#25936

1) The paper referenced contains 4 pages, so it should be available via IEEXplore. Moreover, you can find a copy on http://www.win.tue.nl/~aserebre/MSR2012.pdf

2) Since the survey is only one of the techniques we intend to use, and it will be augmented by analysing the data publicly available in the SE dump, I believe the selection bias is appropriately addressed.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#25937

On 7/23/2012 6:01 PM, Evan Driscoll wrote:

> Leaving aside questions of relevance to the email list and the quality
> of results from a self-selected survey, the PDF is linked directly from
> the Google Scholar link in the original post: "[PDF] from tue.nl".

You're right, off to the side where I missed it.
http://www.win.tue.nl/~aserebre/MSR2012.pdf
for anyone interested. So I withdraw the corresponding parts of my 
comment. Of course, A.S. could have just posted it instead of or in 
addition to the indirect link. Now that I look at it, I agree with the 
intent.

-- 
Terry Jan Reedy

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.python

csiph-web