I was speaking of reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards. It's not clear to me from your comment why re-writing python couldn't be in the set of training tasks used during RLVR.
Then maybe phrase it less dismissively?
‘It’s in the dataset’ sort of implies ‘the model is just reproducing output it was trained on’.
In this case you’re saying ‘the model is repeating tasks it was trained to do’
That’s the difference between accusing someone of just regurgitating something they read, vs praising them for having prepared well for an exam.
This doesn't really make sense. If you have the specific questions of an exam in advance and study those, then your final score on the exam isn't really representative.