I see a variety of contradictions here. For example, the iterated square digit chain had an explicit "only natural numbers" requirement, but the code here mentions 0 as a part of the set. Also, the language here talks about all possible combinations of 1s, which is an odd thing to talk about in the context of a set.
- I have changed set to collection so with k=3, 1,1,1 is valid and c would be 1. 0,9,81 is valid and c would be 6. I have excluded 0,0,0--Nigel Galloway (talk) 16:55, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
To help resolve what this task is really about (and possible task description changes), I think we should see a few result examples.
Its quality is too much low, it's not idiomatic, it's a mess, its lines are too much long, it has no imports and it uses a function not present in Phobos. So I suggest to just remove it from the page unless it's vastly improved (and to conform to Rosettacode standards and to not put the name of the author in the code or page).