Friendship ended with @ovs; they think 0 is a natural number (incorrect opinion): codegolf.stackexchange.com/a/243087

@mathcat I assume your solution is the only solution when n is prime

@Neil Looks like it (at least lyxal's code says so)

But I'm not in a mood to prove that too :P

yay

I just love when I get a problem wrong because I didn't include a y=

tbf 1/2 is just a number, giving the equation of a line is reasonable

i mean, technically 1/2 isn't a line

Sure, but what else would I mean?

I mean, a horizontal asymptote can only really be one thing, and that's a horizontal line

otoh, the question should be "the asymptotes are at y=" and you should just have to put in numbers

if the question had asked for the equation of the asymptote, I'd have put y=1/2

They should at least put both in as possible solutions

I'd be tempted to write y^2=1/4

Golfing math :P

@RadvylfPrograms Asking for the equation of a horizontal asymptote should still mean you give it y=+/-1/2

Just because it's horizontal, it doesn't change the fact that it's an equation

@user ?

> If the question had asked for the equation of the asymptote, I'd have put y=1/2

That's exactly what I said

If it had asked for the equation of the horizontal asymptote, I'd have used y=

Ah, I thought you meant that you put in numbers because it asked for horizontal asymptotes instead of plain asymptotes

@RadvylfPrograms ah

I remember me typing x.y because I'm used to it

but Germans do x,y

So I got a whole lot of online problems wrong because of that

And requiring y= for some problems is especially stupid, because then how do I know if they want y= or f(x)=. For horizontal asymptotes y= might be more obvious, but now that I know I'm dealing with a badly implemented auto-grading thing I'll be paranoid for the next 78 problems

I would hope your teachers go back and inspect wrong answers to check if they're really wrong

pfft, there's 20 of us and several hundred problems each

@RadvylfPrograms Oof yeah, auto grading is pain

The whole point of auto-grading is the teacher doesn't have to look through it

me in jelly

And I could email them but what's the point, it's a single problem out of hundreds

No, it's that they don't have to look at the whole thing. Just looking at the wrong answers is far more manageable

Also, what kind of teacher gives you several hundred problems at a time?

It's a review of all of Calculus AB

@mathcat explain?

that's jelly compression I think

I was afraid last year that I'd have teachers who are just tech-savvy enough to set up auto grading but not tech-savvy enough to make sure that stuff like this doesn't happen, but luckily almost none of them knew how to set up auto grading ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

@RadvylfPrograms Oof

And I've also not been paying attention in class for the last week or so due to Tanks and other projects, so I'm not super sure about how to do the 14 pages of homework I also have

(Which is my fault since I've put those off for the last two weeks)

But at least I've finished my four history assignments I'd been procrastinating

"let's be nice to the students this year and not take point off for late work" is the worst policy of all time

Heh, it's been great for me

(okay, yeah, being that lenient is horrible for learning, but hey, at least no one's getting E's)

The title text of this xkcd is pretty relevant to me

> I don't know how I'd have gotten through high school if I'd had a laptop+wifi.

i don't think I remember a single word any of my teachers had said for the last two months

At first, I thought the school district was being really nice by letting us turn stuff in whenever, giving us 50% for turning in literally anything, letting you negotiate to magically get a better grade, etc., but I realize now it's probably just so it looks like the entire district's doing really well so they get better funding and stuff

@RadvylfPrograms Whoa, so if your teachers ever said "Good morning" to you, you've forgotten "good" and "morning"? :P

Your hand/arm is at risk, user :p

You're too late, the gator attack's already taken those :P

@pxeger ;). I usually try to adopt this to the current context as everyone uses it differently and in BQN the natural numbers include 0. It is also golfier to write than non-negative integers. I would add subscript 0 in mathematical notation though

mlochbaum.github.io/BQN/try.html#code=wq8xLyJ4Ig==

In school I was taught that the term "whole numbers" means "non-negative integers", which is nice and short, but I've never seen that used anywhere else

Really? I was also taught that at all three schools I've gone/am going to

That confuses me even more as the literal translation of that in German is used for Z, all integers

Maybe we should just try to push for the abbreviation nonn ints to be more commonly used

Hmm, that totally won't be pronounced "non-ints" and cause any sort of confusion

what's wrong with "integers >= 0"

I prefer using words were possible, too much mathjax/code formatting makes challenges look more difficult than they actually are

And '>= 0' without mathjax or code formatting looks unprofessional and ugly

Does anyone think a challenge to implement the inside outside algorithm could work?

@lyxal We need a "find first positive integer pair" builtin and maybe a "find first positive integer group of n" builtin - like ṅȯ

@mathcat It's a good challenge and not a dupe.

nice, thanks

I prefer "(non-)?(negative|positive) integers." It's a bit longer, but it's very clear what all four terms mean. "Integers [<>]=? 0" and "(negative|positive) integers( plus 0)?" also work, though they're a bit clunkier. "Natural numbers" doesn't communicate well which numbers are meant--to my mind, nature has plenty of negative and non-integer numbers, though I understand why it wasn't always understood that way historically.

@ovs I always think of "Zahlen" when I see Z, but in german, "Zahlen" means numbers, not whole numbers.

I also vaguely recall the term "counting numbers," which I believe meant positive integers (because when you count things, you say "one, two, three..."). It's a good term for teaching kids, but I don't think it's super helpful on CGCC (not least because of the 0-indexing vs. 1-indexing question).

"The input must be a counting number"

Imagine that in a challenge

@mathcat I mean that "whole numbers" are apparently not the same as "ganze Zahlen"

really?

wait why?

oh, don't whole numbers include negatives?

According to Radvylf's comment not

Well, I was taught "whole numbers" are non-negative ones

But it's a super vague term

i think the definition taught in us schools is whole=nonnegative natural=positive and then the distinction is never made again

@mathcat Ha ha! Yes!

@DLosc that is a great way to teach children about counting numbers err natural numbers

dolbaeb

@WheatWizard indeed?

urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=dolboeb

you dolbaeb (testing purposes)

sounds ... extinct somehow

Hm yeah

Dupe hammer go brr