Does not work properly when a negative number is given
You could also do (0...number) instead of (1...number)
This comment is hidden because it contains spoiler information about the solution
Interesting! I was not aware of the range syntax with 3 dots, where 1...n exludes the end of the range.
O my love. So beautiful
short and pithy,easy to read
last is O(n) anyway, so whether that's in reverse or in something else doesn't really matter.
last
reverse
(If I'm wrong, please call me on it.)
lol forget that already its self xD
I am of the same opinion :)
I believe that without self it would not know what iterable object it was iterating over.
So without specifying 'self' it just forwards it to the existing upcase method?
The entire list is not reversed due to laziness. Unfortunately, I cannot assess to what extent the optimizer discards the overhead...
Loading collection data...
Does not work properly when a negative number is given
You could also do (0...number) instead of (1...number)
This comment is hidden because it contains spoiler information about the solution
Interesting! I was not aware of the range syntax with 3 dots, where 1...n exludes the end of the range.
This comment is hidden because it contains spoiler information about the solution
O my love. So beautiful
short and pithy,easy to read
This comment is hidden because it contains spoiler information about the solution
last
is O(n) anyway, so whether that's inreverse
or in something else doesn't really matter.(If I'm wrong, please call me on it.)
lol forget that already its self xD
I am of the same opinion :)
This comment is hidden because it contains spoiler information about the solution
I believe that without self it would not know what iterable object it was iterating over.
So without specifying 'self' it just forwards it to the existing upcase method?
The entire list is not reversed due to laziness. Unfortunately, I cannot assess to what extent the optimizer discards the overhead...
Loading more items...