Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Quixey Challenge - 1 Bug, 1 Minute, $100

quixeychallenge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–47 of 47 posts

Re: Quixey Challenge - 1 Bug, 1 Minute, $100

#41

Post by frcepeda »

That was fun!

Even though I've never written a single line of Python, the challenge was clear and simple to solve (I'm winner #17).

To the people complaining about them not marking all solutions as correct, it does state in the "About" tab that you have to solve it by either editing one line or adding a new one.

That being said, they should've made it clearer and more visible. I actually failed all the qualifiers except for one because I added/changed more than one line.

If you're gonna participate (which you should!), make sure you take a look at the "About" page.

Re: Quixey Challenge - 1 Bug, 1 Minute, $100

#43

Post by aidenn0 »

mindstab wrote: post #40
aquark wrote: post #15

Note: if you pass the qualifier you need to provide a Skype id to register for the challenge itself.

More than that you need to be able to take a skype call, so doing this at work is out

Or if your microphone on your laptop doesn't work and you didn't know that because you've never tried to use it before.

[edit] Actually I just talked with them on chat, and they were able to set it up without my mike working, so it seems pretty flexible.

Re: Quixey Challenge - 1 Bug, 1 Minute, $100

#44

Post by roryokane »

I passed the challenge! I was able to do it because I tried implementing the solution myself from the problem statement, and made sure I had a correct solution before clicking Start. If you manage to code in the style Quixey has used, you can just diff your code and the buggy code they give you to find the bug. I highly recommend that strategy.

Re: Quixey Challenge - 1 Bug, 1 Minute, $100

#46

Post by sigvef »

orionhickman wrote: post #32
sigvef wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

// is Python's floor division operator, enabled in 2.2[1]. [1]: http://docs.python.org/release/2.2.3/whatsnew/node7.html

I don't understand how this is related.

Someone posted a comment asking for clarification in how the provided solution to the binary search qualifier could possibly work as intended. Specifically, in the following line of code the double slashes were erroneously interpreted as a comment rather than a division operator: mid = start + (end - start) // 2

The comment has since then been deleted.

Post reply on HN