Talk:Fraction reduction: Difference between revisions

m
added a comment about (the) possible 1st name.
(→‎Anomalous cancellation: explained my intentions.)
m (added a comment about (the) possible 1st name.)
Line 10:
 
::: You mistook my intent completely. &nbsp; I was only pointing out that &nbsp; ''anomalous cancellation'' &nbsp; is a somewhat obscure term, &nbsp; whereas &nbsp; ''fraction reduction'' &nbsp; is not. &nbsp; My point had nothing to do with correctness, but &nbsp; ''fraction reduction'' &nbsp; is never-the-less correct. &nbsp; We probably shouldn't be debating which is more correct, but what is more recognizable and easier to find, <u>especially</u> if one doesn't know what the actual name of that method of fraction reduction is. &nbsp; So the experiment is essentially a non-starter, &nbsp; as at that time, I didn't know of the term &nbsp; ''anomalous cancellation''. &nbsp; As far as &nbsp; ''humble numbers'', &nbsp; that is what they are called, but if you have a more recognizable name, I want to hear it. &nbsp; If you search for &nbsp; ''"humble numbers"'', &nbsp; you'll find it &nbsp; (3<sup>rd</sup> entry on my search was a pretty good definition, but I don't use Google&trade;). &nbsp; First entry found was the Rosetta Code task. &nbsp; I've never used Google's&trade; answers (popularity) as a definitive way to gauge correctness. &nbsp; As far as comparing searches for names of methods, &nbsp; it doesn't help if one doesn't <u>know</u> of the term &nbsp; (and an obscure one at that) &nbsp; to try to find it. &nbsp; In any case, with the addition of the new term(s) and link in the task's preamble, it will aid people in finding this Rosetta Code task. &nbsp; However, I have no qualms about you renaming the task (and providing a redirect, I suppose) to: &nbsp; ''"Fraction reduction by anomalous cancellation" or "Fraction reduction by accidental cancellation"''. &nbsp; Of the two, I like the 2<sup>nd</sup> better (maybe because it invokes more about the method of in-appropriate fraction reduction, even though the result is "correct"), &nbsp; but I suppose the 1<sup>st</sup> would probably be more definitive. &nbsp; &nbsp; -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger|Gerard Schildberger]] ([[User talk:Gerard Schildberger|talk]]) 11:32, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
 
::: I was originally toying around with the name: &nbsp; ''fallacious fraction reductions'', &nbsp; but I discarded it. &nbsp; Sounded worse than it was. &nbsp; &nbsp; -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger|Gerard Schildberger]] ([[User talk:Gerard Schildberger|talk]]) 11:43, 4 September 2019 (UTC)