Theo

Pretty sure something like this should find all words if I had a reliable way to check if words existed: repl.it/@Theodorlukin/MeaslyDeliciousTelecommunications

Anyone know how to check if words exist on repl.it

I think so

What's the breakdown?

Turns out not only can I not code, I also can't count

Oh shit that's 9

There's a lot of words in the english language to check

Except that you're essentially checking for each word

I was thinking it might be more efficient to work from the bottom up, considering that you can for example only start with i or a, then only go to an, at, as, ah etc.

That's my kind of tradeoff

@DJMcMayhem Yeah, but it won't be great for actually finding them

@Neil Well done

@DJMcMayhem I'll do that real quick, won't be super efficient tho

Wonder how hard this would be to code up

Well done

Wow can't believe I missed that

satangs -> stangs -> tangs -> tang -> tan -> an -> a

Looks like 7 is the one to beat

Oh looks like it's a place. Probably invalid. It showed up on thefreedictionary.com which has a useful tool for this

spineda -> spined -> spine -> sine -> sin -> in -> I

It works if any of the operators are removed, but not either of the numbers

would something like this 1<==0 in python spark any ideas for anyone?

Otherwise something like ;0 mighta worked

Nope

space and tab both work

Ah. Gotcha

Doesn't pretty much every valid python program have length > 1?

Of length > 1?

True. Sorry I was just kinda thinking out loud

@Zacharý 2 answers in like an hour, on a roll

@CatWizard That eliminates any languages where any sort of 1-character program will crash

@Zacharý Sounds like a good plan

@EriktheOutgolfer Sorry I'm slow on my stars

@Zacharý I say we forbid them from answering until there's an accepted answer, then let them have at it

@Zacharý Think we're gonna get past 200 on this one too?

I'm just dumb

Oh so essentially you're doing sum(l) == len(l) and len(l) > 0

a > b > c compares the b > c first I'm pretty sure

It's evaluating the len(l)>0 first, no?

Yeah

I love posting my wildly sub-par answers here and just watching literally everyone destroy me

Oh. Guess it does

I don;'t think operators right associate, do they?

Then it would give True if there was any true

Yeah

Ooh that one's good

@EriktheOutgolfer Yeah ofc no idea what I was thinking

Probably not optimal but I can't think of a way to do it in just one check

@Adám Python: lambda l:all(l) and bool(l)

We're on 212 languages