Timeline for Sandbox for Proposed Challenges
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
14 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 7, 2018 at 14:32 | comment | added | user202729 | "for the given test cases". Although, yes, normally it is not useful. Whether you think it's necessary is up to you, but I doubt anyone would do it. | |
| Apr 7, 2018 at 14:09 | comment | added | ETHproductions | @user202729 Not sure I understand. How could hard coding possibly be useful for this challenge? | |
| Apr 7, 2018 at 11:15 | comment | added | user202729 | The way to prevent hardcoding is to have hidden test cases. | |
| Apr 7, 2018 at 1:37 | comment | added | ETHproductions | @StephenLeppik Of course. Should be slightly clarified now | |
| Apr 7, 2018 at 1:37 | history | edited | ETHproductions | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 9 characters in body
|
| Apr 6, 2018 at 22:02 | comment | added | Nissa | Am I allowed to print more than 3 sigfigs? | |
| Apr 6, 2018 at 20:54 | history | edited | ETHproductions | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
further cherry-pick test cases
|
| Feb 27, 2018 at 6:04 | comment | added | FryAmTheEggman | I think this looks much better, but there are perhaps too many "mandatory" test cases? Maybe making a split will make it easier for people to check the validity of answers. | |
| Feb 27, 2018 at 1:54 | comment | added | ETHproductions | @FryAmTheEggman Hopefully a little more objective now. | |
| Feb 27, 2018 at 1:52 | history | edited | ETHproductions | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
removed many test cases
|
| Oct 4, 2017 at 16:38 | comment | added | FryAmTheEggman | Perhaps have a few special test cases where they have to match the first three sig figs, and put in a line that those can't be hard coded. Then otherwise floating point errors don't matter? I'm honestly unsure. I've been getting to the point where I want to ask on meta because it always feels like fp questions are unclear or unobservable. | |
| Oct 3, 2017 at 21:38 | comment | added | ETHproductions | Thanks @FryAmTheEggman; I like your suggestion, but I'm afraid if it's not objective enough it'll cause any issues. Any suggestions on how to phrase it? | |
| Oct 2, 2017 at 21:23 | comment | added | FryAmTheEggman | This isn't a huge deal, but I find the "your answer must be accurate to x significant figures" to be a largely unobservable property. The only ways to know that a submission meets this criterium is to check each and every possible combination, or to give an incredibly complex proof. I've always thought it was better to say floating point errors don't matter and to use loopholes otherwise. Maybe just a small thing about having to be able to represent any of the numbers from 1e-4 to 1e9? | |
| Oct 2, 2017 at 20:11 | history | answered | ETHproductions | CC BY-SA 3.0 |