.in and .ans files are shown in the statement if no .interaction file exists.
In the vast majority of interactive problems, the .in files are completely useless and undocumented. Even worse, what should the .ans file be? At that point, just use a .interaction file as we intended. This really feels like a footgun.
There are legitimate usecases for having .in files without a corresponding interaction, though: I ran into this when I had an interactive problem where a .interaction file was unsuitable (you call a function defined in an include runner, which is very common in IOI), but I still wanted the sample to be run. Of course we should still warn in the case where we hide it.
.inand.ansfiles are shown in the statement if no.interactionfile exists.In the vast majority of interactive problems, the
.infiles are completely useless and undocumented. Even worse, what should the.ansfile be? At that point, just use a.interactionfile as we intended. This really feels like a footgun.There are legitimate usecases for having
.infiles without a corresponding interaction, though: I ran into this when I had an interactive problem where a.interactionfile was unsuitable (you call a function defined in anincluderunner, which is very common in IOI), but I still wanted the sample to be run. Of course we should still warn in the case where we hide it.