He covered it, but I don't think he explained what was going on particularly well. I'm surprised by all of the people claiming it was a good explanation. I think if he had picked a few numbers and actually worked them through the algorithm completely it would have been much more of a useful explanation.
I agree. I’m not familiar with Python and figured the '1'*n was just a quirk to convert the int to a string, not an integral part of the process. Kind of a weird way to repeat a string, tbh, but I guess the concision is appreciated in typical Python applications like computer linguistics or something.
