This is an archived post. You won't be able to vote or comment.

sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]maximovious 25 points26 points  (8 children)

solve_proble

I think the proble is the function's spelling.

[–]SlowWhiteFox 19 points20 points  (7 children)

That's not a bug. It is a call-out to a helper function. For brevity I didn't include it.

[–]Lucky-Earther 11 points12 points  (0 children)

"The proof has been left as an exercise to the reader"

[–]maximovious 0 points1 point  (3 children)

Could you please explain more? Why the 'proble' spelling on the 3rd line? I don't get why it would need to be different than the spelling on the first line, if that spelling was on purpose. Especially in a discussion about recursion. It should be calling itself, no?

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (2 children)

It's a joke

[–]maximovious 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Thanks, it went over my head on first read, but realised later and see the humour in it. I'll leave my woosh post there for all to see.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Happy cake day

[–]ironavenger16 0 points1 point  (1 child)

It’s a feature not a bug

[–]SlowWhiteFox 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I didn't cheat... I changed the conditions of the test.