#No
No
Prohibitions on built-ins only apply to built-ins for which the stated purpose is identical to the prohibited task.
Feel free to add your arguments for this position to the below list:
Every code golf answer is a collection of built-ins that accomplish the task.
If there are other (1 byte) answers that do the same thing so that an answer could be any one of them, then at least all but one are not built-ins for the given task, as there aren't multiple built-ins (one would hope) for any given task.
A major goal of banning built-ins is to preclude trivial answers which show neither creativity nor deep knowledge; a post which states that a command does what it is defined to do is valueless. In contrast, a post which exposes a command that solves the challenge on its own, in a way which is not immediately obvious from the definition implies some level of creativity or higher-level understanding of the language.
Built-ins are primarily banned in code-golf challenges; if the challenge bans everything which can solve the problem in 1 byte then they're actually just arbitrarily banning 1 byte solutions in a challenge about reducing bytes. Saying "the winner is the lowest number of bytes, but not lower than N" is something I wouldn't welcome in Code Golf.
[your argument here]
#No
Prohibitions on built-ins only apply to built-ins for which the stated purpose is identical to the prohibited task.
Feel free to add your arguments for this position to the below list:
Every code golf answer is a collection of built-ins that accomplish the task.
If there are other (1 byte) answers that do the same thing so that an answer could be any one of them, then at least all but one are not built-ins for the given task, as there aren't multiple built-ins (one would hope) for any given task.
A major goal of banning built-ins is to preclude trivial answers which show neither creativity nor deep knowledge; a post which states that a command does what it is defined to do is valueless. In contrast, a post which exposes a command that solves the challenge on its own, in a way which is not immediately obvious from the definition implies some level of creativity or higher-level understanding of the language.
Built-ins are primarily banned in code-golf challenges; if the challenge bans everything which can solve the problem in 1 byte then they're actually just arbitrarily banning 1 byte solutions in a challenge about reducing bytes. Saying "the winner is the lowest number of bytes, but not lower than N" is something I wouldn't welcome in Code Golf.
[your argument here]
No
Prohibitions on built-ins only apply to built-ins for which the stated purpose is identical to the prohibited task.
Feel free to add your arguments for this position to the below list:
Every code golf answer is a collection of built-ins that accomplish the task.
If there are other (1 byte) answers that do the same thing so that an answer could be any one of them, then at least all but one are not built-ins for the given task, as there aren't multiple built-ins (one would hope) for any given task.
A major goal of banning built-ins is to preclude trivial answers which show neither creativity nor deep knowledge; a post which states that a command does what it is defined to do is valueless. In contrast, a post which exposes a command that solves the challenge on its own, in a way which is not immediately obvious from the definition implies some level of creativity or higher-level understanding of the language.
Built-ins are primarily banned in code-golf challenges; if the challenge bans everything which can solve the problem in 1 byte then they're actually just arbitrarily banning 1 byte solutions in a challenge about reducing bytes. Saying "the winner is the lowest number of bytes, but not lower than N" is something I wouldn't welcome in Code Golf.
[your argument here]
#No
Prohibitions on built-ins only apply to built-ins for which the stated purpose is identical to the prohibited task.
Feel free to add your arguments for this position to the below list:
Every code golf answer is a collection of built-ins that accomplish the task.
If there are other (1 byte) answers that do the same thing so that an answer could be any one of them, then at least all but one are not built-ins for the given task, as there aren't multiple built-ins (one would hope) for any given task.
A major goal of banning built-ins is to preclude trivial answers which show neither creativity nor deep knowledge; a post which states that a command does what it is defined to do is valueless. In contrast, a post which exposes a command that solves the challenge on its own, in a way which is not immediately obvious from the definition implies some level of creativity or higher-level understanding of the language.
Built-ins are primarily banned in code-golf challenges; if the challenge bans everything which can solve the problem in 1 byte then they're actually just arbitrarily banning 1 byte solutions in a challenge about reducing bytes. Saying "the winner is the lowest number of bytes, but not lower than N" is something I wouldn't welcome in Code Golf.
[your argument here]
#No
Prohibitions on built-ins only apply to built-ins for which the stated purpose is identical to the prohibited task.
Feel free to add your arguments for this position to the below list:
Every code golf answer is a collection of built-ins that accomplish the task.
If there are other (1 byte) answers that do the same thing so that an answer could be any one of them, then at least all but one are not built-ins for the given task, as there aren't multiple built-ins (one would hope) for any given task.
[your argument here]
#No
Prohibitions on built-ins only apply to built-ins for which the stated purpose is identical to the prohibited task.
Feel free to add your arguments for this position to the below list:
Every code golf answer is a collection of built-ins that accomplish the task.
If there are other (1 byte) answers that do the same thing so that an answer could be any one of them, then at least all but one are not built-ins for the given task, as there aren't multiple built-ins (one would hope) for any given task.
A major goal of banning built-ins is to preclude trivial answers which show neither creativity nor deep knowledge; a post which states that a command does what it is defined to do is valueless. In contrast, a post which exposes a command that solves the challenge on its own, in a way which is not immediately obvious from the definition implies some level of creativity or higher-level understanding of the language.
Built-ins are primarily banned in code-golf challenges; if the challenge bans everything which can solve the problem in 1 byte then they're actually just arbitrarily banning 1 byte solutions in a challenge about reducing bytes. Saying "the winner is the lowest number of bytes, but not lower than N" is something I wouldn't welcome in Code Golf.
[your argument here]
#No
Prohibitions on built-ins only apply to built-ins for which the stated purpose is identical to the prohibited task.
Feel free to add your arguments for this position to the below list:
Every code golf answer is a collection of built-ins that accomplish the task.
If there are other (1 byte) answers that do the same thing so that an answer could be any one of them, then at least all but one are not built-ins for the given task, as there aren't multiple built-ins (one would hope) for any given task.
[your argument here]
#No
Prohibitions on built-ins only apply to built-ins for which the stated purpose is identical to the prohibited task.
#No
Prohibitions on built-ins only apply to built-ins for which the stated purpose is identical to the prohibited task.
Feel free to add your arguments for this position to the below list:
Every code golf answer is a collection of built-ins that accomplish the task.
If there are other (1 byte) answers that do the same thing so that an answer could be any one of them, then at least all but one are not built-ins for the given task, as there aren't multiple built-ins (one would hope) for any given task.
[your argument here]