That's an issue. Reraising as such.

Description should not specify sorting to determine the minimum. Don't encourage bad coding.

Specifying the transformation on the first value before telling solvers to return said first value is better description authoring.

IMHO, not worth it, using ORDER BY 6, even if it returns the same right now, it's a lot more prone to errors, and not a good practice. Why? Read this.

My test failed because I did "ORDER BY 6" instead of "ORDER BY species" Logic was correct and output the same, I would suggest changing the test to be a bit more flexible on tis point.

I don't think it's possible to modify the Haskell translation to use Ints instead of Floats without invalidating most of the existing solutions. As a compromise, I've forked the translation so that the random test cases generate integer valued Floats to satisfy the description.

I used rabbit and mouse I didnt know seq and or elem was part of the problem.

I agree I just erased it and did my own.

hey folks, there is little suggestion related to the description above, Third line at second part of it. X should be x.

This one was a good one, made me think for a 45 mintues straight and go through documentations. Was fun!

they are number of bottles.

just retake a look on it.

You are initializing and defining class-level / static variables which is shared amongst all instance when the class is loaded into memory, i.e, subsequent method calls' output will depend on previous stored values in variables ...

Instead, they should be stored as instance variables (within the method itself)

sort sorts the array in-place and does not return anything. So, you would have to store the array in a variable before applying sort, and finally remember to return the sorted array.

You forgot to reset $tmp to 0 when $short == 0. Also, your code would not work if the last word in the given string is the shortest, like

aaa bb c

PHP fork self-approved, closing ^^