Timeline for Loopholes that are forbidden by default
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
26 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 18, 2021 at 11:16 | comment | added | Steve Bennett | Heh, that doesn't seem like an accurate summary of what you linked. | |
| Mar 18, 2021 at 8:20 | comment | added | emanresu A | @SteveBennett HTML and CSS are turing complete. | |
| Jun 17, 2020 at 9:03 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
Commonmark migration
|
|
| Sep 22, 2019 at 2:14 | comment | added | The Fifth Marshal | I don't think that meta post supersedes this. The score (+35/-25) is not high enough to be considered consensus, but if this were to get 15 more upvotes I don't see why that wouldn't mean that the community has changed its mind about whether to allow solutions in non-programming languages. | |
| May 31, 2018 at 0:11 | comment | added | Ørjan Johansen | There should be a mention here that the linked meta post entirely supersedes this. | |
| Jun 5, 2017 at 5:48 | comment | added | Steve Bennett | HTML+CSS would fail this definition, but they often make interesting solutions to challenges. | |
| Mar 16, 2017 at 16:03 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://meta.codegolf.stackexchange.com/ with https://codegolf.meta.stackexchange.com/
|
|
| Mar 16, 2017 at 16:03 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://meta.codegolf.stackexchange.com/ with https://codegolf.meta.stackexchange.com/
|
|
| Mar 16, 2017 at 16:03 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://meta.codegolf.stackexchange.com/ with https://codegolf.meta.stackexchange.com/
|
|
| Mar 16, 2017 at 16:03 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://meta.codegolf.stackexchange.com/ with https://codegolf.meta.stackexchange.com/
|
|
| Mar 16, 2017 at 16:03 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://meta.codegolf.stackexchange.com/ with https://codegolf.meta.stackexchange.com/
|
|
| Dec 2, 2016 at 5:37 | history | edited | jimmy23013 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 103 characters in body
|
| Dec 2, 2016 at 5:21 | history | edited | jimmy23013 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 387 characters in body
|
| Dec 2, 2016 at 5:05 | history | edited | jimmy23013 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 73 characters in body
|
| Sep 11, 2016 at 11:14 | comment | added | univalence | I think answers which use things like HQ9+ should be allowed but not compete. | |
| Jun 28, 2016 at 11:21 | comment | added | Peter Taylor | @Qwertiy, yes. This is a site for programming contests. Answers should be programs, not data. Answering with HTTP headers on the basis that you can view the output in Firefox makes no more sense than answering with a Word document on the basis that you can view the output in Word. | |
| May 17, 2016 at 15:07 | comment | added | jimmy23013 | @Qwertiy I personally don't like banning this. But before this post people were already assuming they were forbidden. | |
| May 17, 2016 at 12:58 | comment | added | Qwertiy | Why? Http is not programming language, but do ypu think this answer is bad? | |
| May 16, 2016 at 7:49 | comment | added | micsthepick | Thank you for the clarification. | |
| May 16, 2016 at 7:38 | comment | added | jimmy23013 | @micsthepick No. Added the definition to this post. | |
| May 16, 2016 at 7:34 | history | edited | jimmy23013 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 272 characters in body
|
| May 16, 2016 at 6:47 | comment | added | micsthepick | I once saw an answer that was an Excel formula. Would this invalidate that answer? | |
| Feb 23, 2016 at 1:06 | history | edited | jimmy23013 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 48 characters in body
|
| Jan 13, 2016 at 14:48 | comment | added | user45941 | This was always forbidden (at least as long as we had criteria for what constitutes a programming language), but it doesn't hurt to have it restated here IMO. | |
| S Jan 13, 2016 at 8:31 | history | answered | jimmy23013 | CC BY-SA 3.0 | |
| S Jan 13, 2016 at 8:31 | history | made wiki | Post Made Community Wiki by jimmy23013 |