One of our latest HNQ's has drawn the attention of alternate solutions.
Soon after the question was posted I answered it with an alternate solution, and got quite a few upvotes. My first version looked like this, it has 0 downvotes:
The best solution is to use
str.join()
, using', '
as the joining string.print(', '.join(flavours) + '.')
Another answer is the following. It has 2 downvotes but no comments saying to review the code:
Using f-strings, which are pretty fast:
flavors = ['chocolate', 'vanilla', 'caramel', 'strawberry', 'coffee'] print(f'{", ".join(flavors)}.')
Another answer is the following, with 1 downvote:
Another option:
print(str(flavours).replace("'","")[1:-1]+".")
It has the following comment at 4 votes:
It's starting to look like SO here. Could you also review the OP's code and explain your method?
Another answer is, it had a few downvotes before the comment saying it's broken arrived.
flavours = ['chocolate','vanilla','caramel','strawberry','coffee'] print(flavours.replace('[','').replace(']','').replace('\'',''))
Botched, but gives you chocolate,vanilla,caramel,strawberry,coffee
To me all the answers look the same - "here's an alternate solution".
In retrospect maybe my answer is low-quality and is worthy of the following comment:
It's starting to look like SO here. Could you also review the OP's code and explain your method?
When providing an alternate solution, what do you have to say for your answer to pass the "one insightful observation"?
Does my answer 'pass' this? Or is it low quality and I deserve some downvotes for violating site rules?