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?
\$\begingroup\$
\$\endgroup\$
2
-
\$\begingroup\$ I think I may have even given that answer before it came up in chat :) codegolf.stackexchange.com/questions/307/obfuscated-hello-world/… \$\endgroup\$– gnibblerFeb 2, 2011 at 20:51
-
4\$\begingroup\$ Possible duplicate of Should answers to fixed-output challenges be written in a programming language? (Another plausible dupe target would be Do submissions have to be answered with a programming language?, but I can't vote to double-dupe on Meta as I don't have a dupehammer here.) \$\endgroup\$– user62131Jun 19, 2017 at 9:25
Add a comment
|
2 Answers
\$\begingroup\$
\$\endgroup\$
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.
\$\begingroup\$
\$\endgroup\$
1
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.
-
\$\begingroup\$ I thought about solving that task with Word field functions. Alas the only way to get a character is to use
SYMBOLwhich, again, violates two rules :-( \$\endgroup\$– JoeyFeb 4, 2011 at 0:04