Talk:Perfect shuffle: Difference between revisions
Content added Content deleted
m (→Hostile task requirement?: changed one word.) |
|||
Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
::: Did anybody realistically think that the programming entries (examples) would actually post 5,000 lines of output (I don't see one long line being easy to peruse). -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger|Gerard Schildberger]] ([[User talk:Gerard Schildberger|talk]]) 20:20, 15 June 2015 (UTC) |
::: Did anybody realistically think that the programming entries (examples) would actually post 5,000 lines of output (I don't see one long line being easy to peruse). -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger|Gerard Schildberger]] ([[User talk:Gerard Schildberger|talk]]) 20:20, 15 June 2015 (UTC) |
||
:::: "lines"? That's not really the problem. The task does however require 5000 numbers for the result (more if you include labeling - but that is left open). --[[User:Rdm|Rdm]] ([[User talk:Rdm|talk]]) 22:03, 15 June 2015 (UTC) |
Revision as of 22:03, 15 June 2015
Hostile task requirement?
When I try to post the result specified by this task, I get a message that the website is offline. Perhaps this is because that result is a 21010 character long line of text. But something similar happens when I try to post the result as a table with 53 lines of 253 characters. Perhaps the task should be changed to not require such a large result? --Rdm (talk) 17:10, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
- If everybody (hopefully) will be eliding the output (to something reasonable), why have the Rosetta Code task ask for 10,000 shuffles? Why not just ask for twenty shuffles (up to a deck size of forty)?. That would make outputs somewhat homogenized. -- Gerard Schildberger (talk) 20:15, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
- Did anybody realistically think that the programming entries (examples) would actually post 5,000 lines of output (I don't see one long line being easy to peruse). -- Gerard Schildberger (talk) 20:20, 15 June 2015 (UTC)