Talk:Loops/N plus one half: Revision history

19 September 2015

• curprev 18:1718:17, 19 September 2015‎ Hout talk contribs‎ 7,258 bytes +3,152‎ →‎A defective task formulation. What can we learn ?

24 January 2015

• curprev 13:3613:36, 24 January 2015‎ Walterpachl talk contribs‎ 4,106 bytes +124‎ →‎Number of items may not be known
• curprev 13:1713:17, 24 January 2015‎ Rdm talk contribs‎ 3,982 bytes +518‎ →‎Number of items may not be known
• curprev 09:4309:43, 24 January 2015‎ Walterpachl talk contribs‎ 3,464 bytes +244‎ →‎Number of items may not be known: new section

29 May 2013

• curprev 15:4515:45, 29 May 2013‎ rosettacode>Axtens‎ 3,220 bytes +220‎ "best"

6 February 2010

• curprev 13:4413:44, 6 February 2010‎ rosettacode>UnderBot‎ m 3,000 bytes 0‎ moved Talk:Loop/n plus one half to Talk:Loops/N plus one half

6 November 2009

• curprev 18:1118:11, 6 November 2009‎ rosettacode>Paddy3118‎ 3,000 bytes +317‎ →‎Task name doesn't make sense?
• curprev 13:5313:53, 6 November 2009‎ Ce talk contribs‎ 2,683 bytes +542‎ →‎Task name doesn't make sense?
• curprev 05:4705:47, 6 November 2009‎ rosettacode>Paddy3118‎ 2,141 bytes +461‎ →‎Task name doesn't make sense?

5 November 2009

• curprev 17:2517:25, 5 November 2009‎ Ce talk contribs‎ 1,680 bytes +508‎ →‎Task name doesn't make sense?
• curprev 06:1006:10, 5 November 2009‎ rosettacode>Paddy3118‎ 1,172 bytes +534‎ →‎Task name doesn't make sense?

4 November 2009

• curprev 21:0921:09, 4 November 2009‎ rosettacode>Mwn3d‎ 638 bytes +403‎ No edit summary
• curprev 21:0021:00, 4 November 2009‎ 81.204.252.55 talk‎ 235 bytes +235‎ Created page with 'I noticed that many implementations don't run the loop 9.5 times. Instead a check is made whether the comma has to be printed. This way the loop still runs exactly 10 times, with…'