Activity for moony
| Type | On... | Excerpt | Status | Date |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Comment | Post #280785 |
Seems so, it's only different for languages where strings aren't implicitly character arrays (more) |
— | about 3 years ago |
| Comment | Post #280766 |
And on the Propeller 1, where Spin is the official language, It's interpreter is physically part of the MCU's ROM, so it's impossible to comply with that rule. (more) |
— | about 3 years ago |
| Comment | Post #280766 |
Case in point: The official language for the Propeller 2, Spin 2, provides some very simple abstractions over the hardware. This is not optional, and is a core part of the interpreter, removing this is nontrivial. (more) |
— | about 3 years ago |
| Comment | Post #280766 |
I do disagree with the "No premade HALs" rule here. It's perfectly acceptable in other challenges to say, for example, you're doing "GCC C++ w/ Boost version here", so it should be acceptable here too. Omitting libc is pretty much just it's own contending language by current rules.
Output format wil... (more) |
— | about 3 years ago |
| Comment | Post #279763 |
Raku continues to make me wonder if it's just a golf language in disguise (more) |
— | over 3 years ago |
| Comment | Post #279659 |
@Quintec it does! That's actually a very inefficient answer though. Would be smarter to try and do, say, TREE(3) iterations of an output.
Maybe take the logarithm base 10 of the output, though. (more) |
— | over 3 years ago |
| Comment | Post #279640 |
16 bytes with no newline output, `>5+#:-#~_$>:#,_@`
Make your own post, it's a more intelligent solution than mine :P (more) |
— | over 3 years ago |
| Comment | Post #279639 |
There's some artifacts from this challenge being written around an answer instead of the other way around. (more) |
— | over 3 years ago |
| Comment | Post #279639 |
@Jo King Codidact has a "suggest changes" feature right? Can you please use that?
As for handling empty inputs: No. (more) |
— | over 3 years ago |
| Comment | Post #279382 |
To summarize: If it compiles, regardless of how awful, warning filled, and evil it is, and runs, and gives the desired output, it's a valid answer. Just specify which version of GCC. The return 0 being absent doesn't fail the challenge on GCC version whatever, so GCC version whatever is the language.... (more) |
— | over 3 years ago |
| Comment | Post #279159 |
@Adam Effectively yes, and i don't feel like going back to change that to "correctly ordered list of numbers", so go for it (more) |
— | over 3 years ago |
| Comment | Post #279204 |
Can you elaborate on the first point? And yea, i'm aware of those, hence me needing to do more work on scoring. An example for the first point would be nice. (more) |
— | over 3 years ago |
| Comment | Post #279148 |
@22t: It’s just basic math, substituting in the variables and solving for the answer of the filled in equation (more) |
— | over 3 years ago |
| Comment | Post #279147 |
@mbomb007 I imagine nothing. Some challenges may make sense to copy over as not everyone wants to use SE (some still have bitter feelings about it)
However, I think people will have some incentive to be creative and make new challenges anyways. (more) |
— | over 3 years ago |