Timeline for Sandbox for Proposed Challenges
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
36 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 13, 2021 at 11:26 | history | edited | user202729 | CC BY-SA 4.0 | deleted 5205 characters in body |
| Feb 13, 2021 at 7:24 | history | edited | user202729 | CC BY-SA 4.0 | added 88 characters in body |
| Feb 13, 2021 at 5:35 | history | edited | user202729 | CC BY-SA 4.0 | added 50 characters in body |
| Feb 12, 2021 at 12:31 | comment | added | user202729 | @Leo Just an arbitrary value that I feel is large enough... | |
| Feb 12, 2021 at 11:55 | comment | added | Leo | Also, it's not important, but why 10000 for the board size? At least for A there's a very easy upper bound of 365 | |
| Feb 12, 2021 at 11:54 | comment | added | user202729 | @Leo I don't plan to accept an answer anyway. The winning criteria is simply to give people things to do. | |
| Feb 12, 2021 at 11:53 | comment | added | Leo | I see, I like it but it may need some clarifying. For example in the header I would put only the values of A and B and the combined score. Then I would add a clause like the ones in answer-chaining challenges: "Once there have not been any improvements to the combined score for X days, the last submission to improve the score will be accepted as the winner" | |
| Feb 12, 2021 at 10:32 | comment | added | user202729 | So, by definition, all the solutions that is not strictly-worse is "worth posting" (improves the combined score). | |
| Feb 12, 2021 at 10:32 | comment | added | user202729 | @Leo Obviously the combined one. Note that the criteria is chosen so that the combined score is always better than or equal to the normal score, and the combined score is always better than the previous combined score. | |
| Feb 12, 2021 at 10:29 | comment | added | Leo | The problem with the combined score is that you have two scores again, the "normal" one and the "combined" one... Does only one or the other count for "victory"? | |
| Feb 12, 2021 at 10:00 | history | edited | user202729 | CC BY-SA 4.0 | added 196 characters in body |
| Feb 12, 2021 at 9:54 | comment | added | user202729 | @Leo as explained in the linked meta post -- (did I explain it clearly enough?) that method would allow essentially the same "every solutions win" situation by letting every such "winning" solution improves the "combined" score. (and is the only one that I can come up with with that condition) | |
| Feb 12, 2021 at 9:53 | comment | added | user202729 | @Leo Because it doesn't encourage these solutions, obviously? -- (I think that the solution with minimum A is pretty interesting, but I'd like to see a solution that generates reasonably-good parametrized solutions too.) | |
| Feb 12, 2021 at 8:57 | comment | added | Leo | to me it looks like the given method to generate a single score from A and B only adds confusion, especially the "combined score" part... what's the advantage compared to a simpler formula like A^2+B^2? (I would be in favour of just using A and B and letting all pareto-optimal solutions win, but I understand that at the moment there's not enough consensus for this) | |
| Feb 12, 2021 at 8:20 | history | edited | user202729 | CC BY-SA 4.0 | added 3 characters in body |
| Feb 12, 2021 at 8:11 | history | edited | user202729 | CC BY-SA 4.0 | added 648 characters in body |
| Feb 12, 2021 at 7:57 | history | edited | user202729 | CC BY-SA 4.0 | added 520 characters in body |
| Feb 12, 2021 at 7:50 | history | edited | user202729 | CC BY-SA 4.0 | deleted 53 characters in body |
| Feb 11, 2021 at 6:48 | history | edited | user202729 | CC BY-SA 4.0 | added 272 characters in body |
| Feb 9, 2021 at 1:41 | comment | added | user202729 | @Bubbler Fixed. | |
| Feb 9, 2021 at 1:41 | history | edited | user202729 | CC BY-SA 4.0 | added 8 characters in body |
| Feb 8, 2021 at 23:24 | comment | added | Bubbler | For the lack of sandbox feedback, I usually leave my challenges for at least a week, regularly asking for feedback in the chat (at least 2 or 3 times before moving to main). | |
| Feb 8, 2021 at 23:21 | comment | added | Bubbler | A minor nitpick: In your Python code, adding string to a number is invalid. I guess you meant to take the inputs as strings, e.g. m1 = "0" etc. | |
| Feb 8, 2021 at 23:20 | comment | added | Bubbler | A post is considered as a consensus only if it's at >= +10 and upvotes >= 2*downvotes. So +5/-4 (at the time of writing) is closer to a controversy than a consensus. I guess many people have just feelings without enough justification about whether it's fine or not. I personally view it as a good challenge, so I upvoted it. | |
| Feb 8, 2021 at 2:32 | history | edited | user202729 | CC BY-SA 4.0 | edited body |
| Feb 3, 2021 at 15:04 | history | edited | user202729 | CC BY-SA 4.0 | added 301 characters in body |
| Feb 2, 2021 at 10:42 | comment | added | user202729 | @Dingus +1 is not a consensus? | |
| Feb 2, 2021 at 10:37 | comment | added | Dingus | There's no consensus on that meta question. I think you should state that if two answers have the same A+B then they score the same. | |
| Feb 2, 2021 at 10:19 | comment | added | user202729 | @Dingus No, see the meta post about challenge having multiple winning conditions. codegolf.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/19041/… | |
| Feb 2, 2021 at 8:43 | comment | added | Dingus | If two answers have the same A+B, is the one with lower A or lower B considered better, or is there no tie-breaker? | |
| Feb 1, 2021 at 11:06 | history | edited | user202729 | CC BY-SA 4.0 | added 142 characters in body |
| Feb 1, 2021 at 3:45 | history | edited | user202729 | CC BY-SA 4.0 | added 205 characters in body |
| Jan 31, 2021 at 14:45 | comment | added | user202729 | Or it could be that the challenge is simply a little hard to read.) | |
| Jan 30, 2021 at 17:16 | comment | added | user202729 | (ah, right. The sandbox is still as inactive as usual.) | |
| Jan 30, 2021 at 17:15 | history | edited | user202729 | CC BY-SA 4.0 | [Edit removed during grace period] |
| Jan 28, 2021 at 10:20 | history | answered | user202729 | CC BY-SA 4.0 |