Is using x for × allowed?

Question

In this question (which is tagged kolmogorov-complexity), many answers used x for ×ばつ. I was wondering if this is generally allowed in such questions, since many answers used it.

• Neil: × is in the Windows-1252 code page, so many answers would automatically score the same byte count anyway.

Answer 1

Not by default

There is no default to let you swap ×ばつ for x (or *). Nor should there be. If you want to make the substitution ask the challenge author. They may change the challenge to allow it.

I give the following reasons:

• This is the same as our policy on trailing whitespace. Challenge authors can choose whether to allow or disallow trailing whitespace of different kinds, with no default.
• Adding defaults like this is meta-cruft. Nobody is going to have read every meta question before posting an answer, so if this were to be a default, a lot of people would not know about it.
  • This could be frustrating to challenge authors who have an intention, but find users invoking a meta rule they were unaware of counter to that intention.
  • This further disadvantages new users who are not intimately familiar with the meta. The game should be about golfing, not about reading the meta for obscure rules.
• Using x over ×ばつ nearly always constitutes an advantage and probably never constitutes a disadvantage. If we allowed this substitution for all answers, there would never be a reason not to do it. Golfing is better when you have more choices to cleverly evaluate. This doesn't do that.

Lastly I will give a perhaps controversial personal opinion:

• Not every challenge should be perfectly "smooth". Extra snags and weird little things that complicate golfing are good for challenges. Having every challenge exactly set up for the easiest way to golf it makes things a little boring. Having a non-ascii character adds a little roughness to challenges and we should not override that in favor of a smooth experience.

So are those answers on that challenge invalid? Yes. They don't follow the spec, they are technically invalid. That question is over a decade old, and the site was different then. You can see it in how bare-bones the challenge itself is. A challenge like that would not be well received today.