Talk:Determine if a string is collapsible: Difference between revisions
Content added Content deleted
| Line 34: | Line 34: | ||
Good question, and that "determine if" thematic framing of the task inevitably produces clear expectations of a String -> Bool predicate, returning True or False for a given string. |
Good question, and that "determine if" thematic framing of the task inevitably produces clear expectations of a String -> Bool predicate, returning True or False for a given string. |
||
That expectation is then lead completely astray into open fields, where no mention of any kind of test or predicate can actually be found in the detail of the sub-tasks [[User:Hout|Hout]] ([[User talk:Hout|talk]]) 14:39, 8 June 2020 (UTC) |
That expectation is then lead completely astray into open fields, where no mention of any kind of test or predicate can actually be found in the detail of the sub-tasks. [[User:Hout|Hout]] ([[User talk:Hout|talk]]) 14:39, 8 June 2020 (UTC) |
||
To put it another way, the title suggests writing an testing something like this: |
|||
<pre>containsConsecutivelyRepeatedCharacters :: String -> Bool |
|||
containsConsecutivelyRepeatedCharacters = (>) . length <*> (length . group)</pre> |
|||
and the tasks describe something quite different. A (String -> String) function which defines a new string but 'determines' nothing. [[User:Hout|Hout]] ([[User talk:Hout|talk]]) 14:48, 8 June 2020 (UTC) |
|||