You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
The current order of the exercises doesn't seem to make much sense - "leap" and "etl" come very late, "hamming" and "point-mutations" are basically the same, etc.
For the reordering, are there other important criteria apart from difficulty?
I'd also like to focus the nitpicking community by deprecating some exercises whose core problem appears in other exercises.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
I think this is a really good idea, both reordering and deprecating problems to focus the nitpicking in. I'm guessing that over time the language tracks will diverge, because some problems are more interesting and/or more relevant than others.
For reordering, it's sometimes useful to have easy-harder-harder-easier-harder-harder so that people don't get completely stuck, but there's no science behind any of this yet.
The current order of the exercises doesn't seem to make much sense - "leap" and "etl" come very late, "hamming" and "point-mutations" are basically the same, etc.
For the reordering, are there other important criteria apart from difficulty?
I'd also like to focus the nitpicking community by deprecating some exercises whose core problem appears in other exercises.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: