Some questions require some amount of golfing because they have a maximum byte limit or are answer chaining and require no more than x bytes added to the previous answer.

However, code golf is not the winning criterion.

What should these questions be tagged?


2 Answers 2



Tags are about search-ability. We want people to get relevant results when they search a tag.

Categorizing these as is misleading if not false. These types of questions are not code-golf and any person looking for code-golf questions would not want to see these. Plain and simple.

While these questions do technically impose a source restriction they should not be tagged because thats not what restricted source is about. Restricted source questions are about creating interesting puzzles by removing the ability to use all of the aspects of a language. Most commonly size limits are put in place as a way to prevent people from obtaining arbitrarily large scores. Since people searching for a tag are looking for challenges about that tag, the tag should be salient to the challenge for it to be applied.

We should also not make a new tag. The new tag would add nothing. I cannot imagine a situation where someone would want to search for questions with this feature. Its not a style of question and the questions would be a largely random selection of questions. Its like having a tag for challenges that ban builtins. We don't need to categorize every aspect of a question, just the ones people might search for.


From the wiki for :

Code-golf is a competition to solve a particular problem in the fewest bytes of source code ... If source code length is not the primary scoring criterion, consider using another tag instead.

In these challenges, source code length is not the primary scoring criterion; rather, it is simply an additional restriction that affects validity not scoring.

From the wiki for , however:

Imposes a restriction on the source code used to solve the challenge

Generic, but describes exactly what's going on here.

hasn't been used anywhere and sounds more like actually compressing (like gzip) source code in some way, so I don't think it's a good fit.


You must log in to answer this question.