On Dec 12, 2005, at 6:33 AM, David Balmain wrote:

> Errr.... Since it went out to the world I just want to be clear on one
> thing. The point I was trying to make about not being included in the
> quiz summary was that my solution isn't very Rubyish and is more
> interesting from and algorithms perspective than a coding perspective.
> I hope that's clear. :-\

No worries, you didn't offend me.  ;)

There's no real science about how I choose a solution to discuss.  I  
read them all and when one inspires me, I talk about it.  Very  
systematic, as you can see.  ;)

I will tell you that I notice I'm getting pickier and pickier about  
code length though.  I'm certainly not looking to encourage golf  
(that's pretty much the opposite of what Ruby Quiz stands for) and  
I'm not trying to slack off on summary work, but I truly believe  
correct Ruby involves "Writing less code."

So a good tip for catching my eye is not using five lines when two  
will do.  Sprinkle in a few clever Ruby style idioms and you've got a  
better than average chance of getting singled out.

Just FYI.

James Edward Gray II