My history teacher: You guys are always on your phones. Be more like Redwolf, he's _always_ paying attention. Me: Chatting in TNB, haven't even opened my notebook
You were literally aleays in tnb last year (and i presume this year too but i can’t get online anymore to disapprove of you while i do the same thing myself)
A string type should be identical to arrays except for maybe a dozen operators
If you ever have to convert between them, it's because you're turning that string into an array of numbers or booleans, and that cast should be part of whatever operator you're using to do the conversion
Ig it depends on which kinds of challenges you’re optimizing for
@RedwolfPrograms but it’s not, you need more conversions the more string-specific overloads you add. And if you have very few stribg overloads, then why have string type separate at all?
And with the type conversion, if your strings have everything you'd need for arrays too, you don't need many casts at all, and you just build those into other operators
if you have a box, composed of many smaller boxes where you know the dimensions of the smaller boxes and you know the overall width of the parent container, Is there a way to determine the length of the parent rectangle, for any arrangement of the inner containers?
@rues Lowercasing [0 1 2] is meaningless. Converting [10 11 12] to title case is meaningless. Taking the cumsum of "Hi dad!" is stupid. Finding the average of "This is a string." is pointless.
@rues BTW in a golfing language, I support + casting to numbers for addition, and a separate concat op
@pxeger I have a box that contains many smaller elements, the dimensions of these elements can be changed by the user. When they change the dimensions of these containing elements the overall dimensions of the parent container adjust length wise. However some of the adjustments run parallel to the width, and so there is no way to determine the overall length of the container.
What I'm arguing against is treating numlists and charlists the same, and having a lower case operator, for example, that also "works" on numlists and does nothing
If you have charlists with overloads where needed, that's a string. That's fine.
@RedwolfPrograms I'm not an expert on AI-generated texts these days, but would an AI make a typo like "The world has com so far"? It's such a standard phrase that I would expect any AI trained on actual text to use the correct spelling.
It might've been given text with lots of spelling mistakes as a prompt, if you look at stuff like GPT-3 the quality of the grammar depends on the prompt quite often
> i know that ur probly thinking this is stupid and not rite, well ur rite it is stupid.
Once you introduce spelling errors and such into the prompt, the AI will not only use the spelling errors in the prompt, but also create its own spelling errors, so I could definitely see that text being AI-generated.
@RedwolfPrograms correction: it has length-1 python strings that aren't affected at all by or error on most math builtins but can be doubled to length-2 python strings by Ḥ and cease to play nice from there
@DLosc A better example would probably be Vyxal's x. Inside of a function, it calls the current function, for recursion and stuff, but outside of a function, it prints the entire stack.
