Draft
A Simple Postfix Language #2
Loading description...
.avif)
This comment has been reported as {{ abuseKindText }}.
Show
This comment has been hidden. You can view it now .
This comment can not be viewed.
- |
- Reply
- Edit
- View Solution
- Expand 1 Reply Expand {{ comments?.length }} replies
- Collapse
- Spoiler
- Remove
- Remove comment & replies
- Report
{{ fetchSolutionsError }}
-
-
Your rendered github-flavored markdown will appear here.
-
Label this discussion...
-
No Label
Keep the comment unlabeled if none of the below applies.
-
Issue
Use the issue label when reporting problems with the kata.
Be sure to explain the problem clearly and include the steps to reproduce. -
Suggestion
Use the suggestion label if you have feedback on how this kata can be improved.
-
Question
Use the question label if you have questions and/or need help solving the kata.
Don't forget to mention the language you're using, and mark as having spoiler if you include your solution.
-
No Label
- Cancel
Commenting is not allowed on this discussion
You cannot view this solution
There is no solution to show
Please sign in or sign up to leave a comment.
Description for
4. decreasemakes me thinkdecreaseshould take one top element from the stack and split it in two, in some undefined way. That is the opposite ofincrease, after all.You probably mean
addandsubtract.Please don't fix this - it'll still be a duplicate kata.
Description is missing
0. startPlease don't fix this - it'll still be a duplicate kata.
Duplicate.
Why would this not be a problem?
What do you mean?
Apparently you already know it's a duplicate. But you published it anyway, with a mention in the description.
Why would you think it's not a problem to publish a duplicate kata? Duplicate kata should not be published, or, when published anyway, should be unpublished. What part of that do you not understand? Saying "I know it's a duplicate" does not change anything.
Ok. Unpublished already.
Changing the description to not declare this a duplicate does not make it not a duplicate. And unpublishing and then republishing does not solve THIS BEING A DUPLICATE which MUST NOT BE PUBLISHED.
I get that you want to publish the kata. But the whole idea is a duplicate of a five year old kata. You cannot fix that. You can never publish this kata and not run afoul of it being a duplicate.
The only thing to do is unpublishing this kata, having an original idea, and creating and publishing that kata.
Having an original idea is hard, because
8 000original ideas have already been published as kata in the last6years, and most good ideas have been done already. That still does not make it right to start publishing duplicates. Life sucks, I know. But you seem to be thinking "I must publish a kata. Any kata." You appear not to be thinking "Does this kata add anything novel to CodeWars?" Adding subtraction ( yeah yeah, and multiplication and division ) simply is not sufficiently novel.