Anonymous user
Talk:Sequence: smallest number greater than previous term with exactly n divisors: Difference between revisions
Talk:Sequence: smallest number greater than previous term with exactly n divisors (view source)
Revision as of 08:26, 10 April 2019
, 5 years ago→output for F#: added another comment or two.
m (→output for F#: added another comment or two.) |
|||
Line 22:
:::: Since this is still a ''draft task'', do you think that the task definition/requirement should be tightened up (and/or refined as to make it ''un-vague'') so that all computer programming solutions/entries are solving the same task? The main purpose of Rosetta Code (I think) is to compare programs, but if some programs are solving a different requirement than the others, it's impossible to compare algorithms. -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger|Gerard Schildberger]] ([[User talk:Gerard Schildberger|talk]]) 05:33, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
::::: Let creator of the task decide or the first entry, which was [[Anti-primes_Plus#Go|GO]] which leads to [[oeis:A069654|OEIS: A069654]] -- [[User:Horsth|Horsth]]
:::::: I didn't have anybody else in mind, the task's author is almost always the best person to do the tidying up. But from my experience, it seems that everybody has an opinion of what's a better way to phrase things, and I can talk from days of past that task requirements and phrasing have been changed/modified/mucked way beyond what the task author intended. -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger|Gerard Schildberger]] ([[User talk:Gerard Schildberger|talk]]) 08:25, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
| |||