2
\$\begingroup\$

The question appeared on chat. For the Hello, world! problem Uryyb, jbeyq! is a solution in rot13, but rot13 is not a general purpose language. Should these languages be allowed?

\$\endgroup\$
4
\$\begingroup\$

In this specific case, the answer could be written as a bash script that includes the rot13 call. So it's tricky to eliminate any such answers and it'll be hard to police. I think that the community will do the appropriate job of voting these answers up/down based on how sensible they are.

So until a really inappropriate language comes up my vote is yes, they should be allowed.

\$\endgroup\$
  • \$\begingroup\$ I thought about solving that task with Word field functions. Alas the only way to get a character is to use SYMBOL which, again, violates two rules :-( \$\endgroup\$ – Joey Feb 4 '11 at 0:04
4
\$\begingroup\$

I don't think we need to over regulate here. The answer does slip past 2 of the 3 conditions already imposed by the question.

The simple fix is to ask slightly harder questions.

Probably it's a good idea to aim in say the 40-100 char range for the best perl/golfscript/ruby/python answers when you compose a question.

\$\endgroup\$

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .