

Not quite. As the previous commenter said, every string has at least one string representation (i.e. 100 -> “100”, “1e2”). So there’s no sensible way to write a pure function handling that, you’re just cooked no matter what you do.
Not quite. As the previous commenter said, every string has at least one string representation (i.e. 100 -> “100”, “1e2”). So there’s no sensible way to write a pure function handling that, you’re just cooked no matter what you do.
We’re cooked chat.
Amazing.
What are your thoughts on the 1999 War in Dagestan?
No pre-order bonus
No battle pass
not even skins
Video game disregarded.
omg he literally me fr
Huge news for the WW3 odds. ✍️
Nooo he’d be a Teto fan :(
White women when there’s an active shooter at Walmart and the Stanley cups are left unguarded.
Diabolical
Uhh thanks I guess? You too
solar panels, duhh. why’d you think they were called that?
Yuck
Bruh you’re an .ml why are you stanning a scab.
Keep thinking about it, you’ll get there.
by putting at least some of it into a traditional savings account.
Where do you think the bank gets its money from?
Glavset must be tightening its belt.
Yeah I mean it’s definitely possible to write a mostly sensible string-number equality function that only breaks in edge-cases, but at this point it’s all kinda vibes-based mush, and the real question is like… Why would you want to do that? What are you really trying to achieve?
The most likely case is that it’s a novice that doesn’t understand what they’re doing and the Python setup you describe does a better job at setting up guardrails.
I don’t really see the connection to concatenation, that’s kind of its own thing.