The PL/SQL Challenge (www.plsqlchallenge.com) offers a daily quiz on the PL/SQL language, through which thousands of Oracle technologists demonstrate and deepen their knowledge of PL/SQL. This blog contains posts by the PL/SQL Challenge founder, Steven Feuerstein, as well as comments from players.
12 October 2010
Steven is humbled; 2nd adjustment for 11 October is made (1504)
I feel that, generally, I am pretty good at admitting that I am wrong. But for some reason, when it came to the 11 October quiz, I didn't want to admit that "see -100" was ambiguous, when combined with the actual output of the quiz, which displayed -100 twice.
In any case, I have been humbled by the many comments on the previous post for this quiz. There is no doubt how many of you feel. I am not running the PL/SQL Challenge to show how right I can be, no matter what anyone else thinks. I am spending lots of my "spare" time on the PL/SQL Challenge to give you an opportunity to learn about and enjoy the PL/SQL language.
So....with all my thanks and apologies, I will change the text of this quiz so that "-100" will only be displayed once. I will give everyone credit for a correct selection of the two choices that contain forward references for proc2, and I will recalculate scores.
Then I will finish preparation for the Q3 championship playoff!
Thanks to all of you for caring enough about the PL/SQL Challenge and your rank to make your views known.
Regards, Steven
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Steven
ReplyDeletedid you mean to give a credit to players who did not select any choice as correct, did you?
Regards
Ludo
I can't do this part way. If you did NOT select the two forward references to proc2, you get "extra credit," no matter what you answered for the other choices.
ReplyDeleteOk. I still don't understand it but I trust you that you know what you are doing :))
ReplyDeleteI can already see some changes in ranking.. :)
Regards
Ludo
Steven
ReplyDeleteBeing one of those who deliberately didn't check any of the answers after getting suspicious about the -100 appearing twice, I must admit I'm relieved to discover about your 2nd adjustment. Thx!
Regards
Rob
"Humble??" Steven??? Must have been a transitory anomaly. :-) Steven, your projected self-assurance is exactly why I like you so much. That and your willingness to back up and clarify things when they go wrong. We could all learn from your methods.
ReplyDeleteI really appreciate your willingess to share your knowledge and to put up with our stuff around "The Quiz". "The Quiz" is definitely the high-light of my work days.
Sorry, this quiz becomes more a conquest in English. If was fun but now it's not.
ReplyDeleteThank you for the past
I'm out
I completely mis-read today's quiz for October 12th, and looking at the average score, I am assuming everyone else did too. I thought all the choices referred to an empty table/array, even though in retrospect you clearly say otherwise. Live and learn, I guess.
ReplyDeleteYes, the quiz would be much more clear if a comment like /* some operations on the l_table here */ will be present in the block.
ReplyDelete@alc, you're not the only one :) I missed the bit that said "regardless of the array contents"...
ReplyDelete