Timeline for Is this number a factorial?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
7 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 31, 2019 at 19:07 | comment | added | Dennis | @Deadcode Checking for 0 would require two extra bytes. If not sure if the OP's definition of "natural numbers" includes 0 or not. The test cases don't... | |
| Jan 31, 2019 at 17:43 | comment | added | Deadcode | Interestingly, this returns true for 0, while @LeakyNun's 3 byte answer, while much slower in general, correctly returns false for 0. Are extra bytes needed to return false for 0 in an efficient-execution-time answer? | |
| Sep 22, 2017 at 23:45 | history | edited | Dennis | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 4 characters in body
|
| May 20, 2017 at 15:16 | comment | added | Dennis | It's a dramatic complexity improvement at the cost of one byte and it's a clever use of a built-in if I may say so myself. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ | |
| May 20, 2017 at 15:14 | history | edited | Dennis | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 425 characters in body
|
| May 20, 2017 at 15:10 | comment | added | Okx | Because us code golfers care about efficiency. | |
| May 20, 2017 at 15:09 | history | answered | Dennis | CC BY-SA 3.0 |