-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 546
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Refine wording in Saddle Points #2413
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Changes from 1 commit
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
@@ -5,7 +5,7 @@ Your task is to find the potential trees where you could build your tree house. | |||||
The data company provides the data as grids that show the heights of the trees. | ||||||
The rows of the grid represent the east-west direction, and the columns represent the north-south direction. | ||||||
|
||||||
An acceptable tree will be the largest in its row, while being the smallest in its column. | ||||||
An acceptable tree will have the greatest height in its row, while having the least height in its column. | ||||||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Suggested change
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. @kotp "will the tallest" should that be "will be the tallest"? There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. @MatthijsBlom What about the above suggestion? There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. This suggestion comes down to -An acceptable tree will be the largest in its row, while being the smallest in its column.
+An acceptable tree will be the tallest in its row, while being the shortest in its column. which doesn't solve the problem this PR aims to solve. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Couldn't we use the phrasing from the introduction? There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. We could. I figured the difference between There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. I'm fine with unifying them, especially when it turns out that the terminology is so hard to get right. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. If we use the same wording in both cases, we could also de-duplicate. One potential advantage of using two different descriptions: these provide different perspectives on the same problem. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. I did not agree to applying this suggestion, but it was applied anyway. The point of my change was to fix an inaccuracy. This now applied suggestion effectively reverts my change and reintroduces the original inaccuracy. This inaccuracy has previously irritated people, hence this PR. See the forum thread, and the other threads here. |
||||||
|
||||||
A grid might not have any good trees at all. | ||||||
Or it might have one, or even several. | ||||||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I agree with @jordancurve that there is a risk here of the very same confusion that we are trying to avoid.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Isn't the largest or greatest height "tallest tree" and the least height being the "shortest tree", given the problem we are solving?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The problem is that «the tallest tree» might not be unique. People have been frustrated by test cases with several tallest/shortest trees per row/column, because based on the instructions they expected there to be only one.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The tests should enforce the detail though, right? So any ambiguity is clarified by expressed expectation, one would think.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The whole point of this PR is to clarify this point. It is okay fort the prose to omit a detail and for the test to enforce that detail. It is less okay for the prose to imply one thing and the test to enforce something that contradicts that thing.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The tests do seem to have covered multiple "shortest tree" at least in the single column test. Or to express it in the way the test explains it "saddle points" meaning there can be more than one.
I wholly agree that the prose should not contradict, while omission is OK (not great, necessarily, but sometimes purposefully done).
I think that the detail that there may be more than one saddle point is expressed in the tests even by name.
We may see that here: