On Nov 17, 2008, at 4:27 AM, Robert Dober wrote:

>> Agreed. I said it was cheating, but I didn't say "don't cheat."  :D
>>
>>
> Sorry for nitpicking, but it is *not* cheating.

Provide a simple, better word for "going against intended guidelines"  
and I'll consider it.

In reality, I think most people understand that it is being used  
tongue-in-cheek. And, as I stated, "cheating" is acceptable.



> It might not be what
> you want and it is important to know what you consider a valid
> submission or not.

Basically, anything within reason that solves the quiz problem is  
valid, "cheating" or not.



> Not that I want to make your job harder than it is already but

> solutions that are submitted here might be interesting for the humble
> reader even if they do not hit the spirit of the quiz on its
> sweet-spot, and you might not review them. Would you tend to agree on
> this?

How about just writing a solution that solves the quiz -- "cheating"  
if you like, not "cheating" if you don't like -- and leave the spirits  
to go haunt some Perl coder. I never have time to fully review all the  
solutions, "cheating" or not. But I generally give everything a once- 
over. Just because you do something that I've called cheating will not  
automatically send your submission to the trash bin. On the contrary,  
I'll probably point it out as "the right way" to do things.


If your main issue is that you think "cheat" implies dishonesty, then  
understand I mean no such thing. gsub(/cheat/, "reuse") and you'll be  
happier.