I'm not going to say it's inappropriate, but I personally don't see the advantages you list.
It encourages usage of "less popular" languages, as none of the Big Three (Small Three?) - Pyth, CJam and GolfScript - are object-oriented.
I don't really think those three languages are as popular as you think. According to this query, at least, the top three languages on the site are Python, Javascript, and Ruby. C, Perl and Haskell are all ahead of any of those three as well, and Java has about as many as Cjam or Golfscript.
The usage of named functions ensures that everyone's code has the same interface. It would also expose cheating (e.g. reducing print() to p()).
I'm not sure how reducing the name of a function is "cheating". If everybody's code uses print(), it's seven characters. If they use p() instead, it's three, but this is a standard reduction, and it's even in the code golf tag wiki code golf tag wiki. It's not like one guy is winning these things by doing it, everybody should be.
Class challenges could introduce some new and interesting simple questions (which I personally prefer to the more complex/mathematically demanding challenges), but there is scope to expand these to something more complex.
Maybe I'm just seeing it wrong, but to me it sounds like it adds more boilerplate without more functionality. If a challenge is simple, and is only remotely interesting because it's "in a class", I would just skip on by. It was a good day when writing a function (rather than a full program) became a default option here, because boilerplate just isn't fun, at least not to me.
I'm not going to say it's inappropriate, but I personally don't see the advantages you list.
It encourages usage of "less popular" languages, as none of the Big Three (Small Three?) - Pyth, CJam and GolfScript - are object-oriented.
I don't really think those three languages are as popular as you think. According to this query, at least, the top three languages on the site are Python, Javascript, and Ruby. C, Perl and Haskell are all ahead of any of those three as well, and Java has about as many as Cjam or Golfscript.
The usage of named functions ensures that everyone's code has the same interface. It would also expose cheating (e.g. reducing print() to p()).
I'm not sure how reducing the name of a function is "cheating". If everybody's code uses print(), it's seven characters. If they use p() instead, it's three, but this is a standard reduction, and it's even in the code golf tag wiki. It's not like one guy is winning these things by doing it, everybody should be.
Class challenges could introduce some new and interesting simple questions (which I personally prefer to the more complex/mathematically demanding challenges), but there is scope to expand these to something more complex.
Maybe I'm just seeing it wrong, but to me it sounds like it adds more boilerplate without more functionality. If a challenge is simple, and is only remotely interesting because it's "in a class", I would just skip on by. It was a good day when writing a function (rather than a full program) became a default option here, because boilerplate just isn't fun, at least not to me.
I'm not going to say it's inappropriate, but I personally don't see the advantages you list.
It encourages usage of "less popular" languages, as none of the Big Three (Small Three?) - Pyth, CJam and GolfScript - are object-oriented.
I don't really think those three languages are as popular as you think. According to this query, at least, the top three languages on the site are Python, Javascript, and Ruby. C, Perl and Haskell are all ahead of any of those three as well, and Java has about as many as Cjam or Golfscript.
The usage of named functions ensures that everyone's code has the same interface. It would also expose cheating (e.g. reducing print() to p()).
I'm not sure how reducing the name of a function is "cheating". If everybody's code uses print(), it's seven characters. If they use p() instead, it's three, but this is a standard reduction, and it's even in the code golf tag wiki. It's not like one guy is winning these things by doing it, everybody should be.
Class challenges could introduce some new and interesting simple questions (which I personally prefer to the more complex/mathematically demanding challenges), but there is scope to expand these to something more complex.
Maybe I'm just seeing it wrong, but to me it sounds like it adds more boilerplate without more functionality. If a challenge is simple, and is only remotely interesting because it's "in a class", I would just skip on by. It was a good day when writing a function (rather than a full program) became a default option here, because boilerplate just isn't fun, at least not to me.
I'm not going to say it's inappropriate, but I personally don't see the advantages you list.
It encourages usage of "less popular" languages, as none of the Big Three (Small Three?) - Pyth, CJam and GolfScript - are object-oriented.
I don't really think those three languages are as popular as you think. According to this query, at least, the top three languages on the site are Python, Javascript, and Ruby. C, Perl and Haskell are all ahead of any of those three as well, and Java has about as many as Cjam or Golfscript.
The usage of named functions ensures that everyone's code has the same interface. It would also expose cheating (e.g. reducing print() to p()).
I'm not sure how reducing the name of a function is "cheating". If everybody's code uses print(), it's seven characters. If they use p() instead, it's three, but this is a standard reduction, and it's even in the code golf tag wiki. It's not like one guy is winning these things by doing it, everybody should be.
Class challenges could introduce some new and interesting simple questions (which I personally prefer to the more complex/mathematically demanding challenges), but there is scope to expand these to something more complex.
Maybe I'm just seeing it wrong, but to me it sounds like it adds more boilerplate without more functionality. If a challenge is simple, and is only remotely interesting because it's "in a class", I would just skip on by. It was a good day when writing a function (rather than a full program) became a default option here, because boilerplate just isn't fun, at least not to me.