| Mar
13 |
awarded | Yearling | |
| 2018 | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Mar
13 |
awarded | Yearling | |
| 2017 | |||
| Mar
13 |
awarded | Yearling | |
| 2016 | |||
| Mar
13 |
awarded | Yearling | |
| 2015 | |||
| Mar
13 |
awarded | Yearling | |
| Feb
1 |
awarded | Nice Answer | |
| 2014 | |||
| Nov
18 |
comment |
Sandbox for Proposed Challenges
"You may assume your program won't receive invalid input." Why would it receive any input at all? What exactly is "valid" input here? |
|
| Nov
18 |
answered | Golf Practice questions | |
| Nov
15 |
comment |
Sandbox for Proposed Challenges
If I understand the refined question correctly, the goal is to retrieve the parameter names for the parameters of a function from inside the function itself, using reflection-style capabilities. With some help, I think that could be turned into something language-agnostic (though it'd need some good way of disallowing hardcoded results). |
|
| Nov
2 |
awarded | Critic | |
| Nov
1 |
comment |
Should point-free function expressions be allowed when a function is asked for?
@COTO what is the rationale for requiring the parentheses (or a name)? It is a function-value expression in either case. |
|
| Nov
1 |
awarded | Student | |
| Oct
31 |
comment |
Should point-free function expressions be allowed when a function is asked for?
Sure, so that's one argument in favour of allowing them. The reason I ask is because I remember some opposition on this before (but I can't remember when, and considering how infrequently I post here it might've been long ago so it might not be relevant anymore). |
|
| Oct
31 |
asked | Should point-free function expressions be allowed when a function is asked for? | |
| Sep
24 |
awarded | Autobiographer | |
| Aug
21 |
comment |
Sandbox for Proposed Challenges
I think it's fine to keep "at least" there for flavour, same with additional adjectives. Also, someone might figure out a way to make the code shorter with a longer adjective (for that reason, having a few more adjectives might be nice) |
|
| Aug
17 |
comment |
What are programming languages?
@Scott random application of string-rewriting rules (or s/// regex replacement) is Turing-complete. Check out the esolangs Thue and /// on the esolang wiki (can't provide link at the moment). |
|
| Aug
16 |
comment |
What are programming languages?
As for different sets of coreutils on different systems, this is partly settled by standards, and partly by specifying what version a program is for (e.g. "GNU sed" or "bash" rather than "sed" or "sh"). Besides, the situation is pretty similar with e.g. BASIC in that a program for one platform might not work on another one. |
|
| Aug
16 |
comment |
What are programming languages?
I think the important difference between the sed/awk case and rot13 is that the former two take some file specifying a transformation (sed does so via the -f parameter) whereas rot13 does not. Or is rot13 specified to ignore any excess arguments? In that case, an empty file could be considered a "rot13 program" if one wants to bend the rules.
|
|
| Aug
15 |
comment |
A Better Help Center
This is mostly about things we can do on our own and unrelated to the sandbox, from what I gather, so not at all addressed by Grace Note's answer I believe. |
|
