Talk:Greedy algorithm for Egyptian fractions: Difference between revisions

m (Nigel Galloway moved page Talk:Egyptian fractions to Talk:Greedy algorithm for Egyptian fractions: see talk page)
 
Line 10:
 
::: I disagree with your definition of what a cop-out is. &nbsp; A choice of practicality and/or expediency doesn't make it a cop-out; there's isn't any need to use pejorative words. &nbsp; Whether or not anybody talks about Egyptian fractions for improper fractions (or not) doesn't change the fact that the use of same is part of this Rosetta Code task. &nbsp; It's there. &nbsp; If you want to solve the improper fraction your way, please feel free to do so. &nbsp; it'll be very interesting to see your solution for the 3<sup>rd</sup> fraction, the vulgar one. &nbsp; You can repeat that phrase about ''any rational number ···'' as much as you want, I'm not disagreeing with you. &nbsp; You're beating a dead horse. &nbsp; I don't understand your comment about ''it's (the integer part) not there to begin with''. &nbsp; An improper fraction ''has'' an integer part, it's just expressed as part of the improper fraction, I just chose to have the integer part split off from the fraction part of the number before converting it to an Egyptian fraction. &nbsp; As for making something up to prevent ···, I didn't. &nbsp; That's not what I did, and that's not what I intended. &nbsp; Nothing is preventing any rebellion. &nbsp; Programmers are still free to express/display the unit fractions in any matter they want. &nbsp; So far, only unit fractions with a 1 (unity) over a solidus ('''/''') are being used (to date) in the programming examples' outputs. &nbsp; I included the new part of the task to answer/rebuttal your flagging of examples as incorrect. &nbsp; I also would like the ceasing of name-calling and incorrect characterizations of what I have done or have responded to; it's not professional nor civil. &nbsp; Whether it be narrow-minded, lame, or other ill-chosen words, it's just not polite and sets a wrong tone for conversations/discussions on Rosetta Code, whether it be in talk pages or elsewhere. &nbsp; These conversations will be around for a long time. -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger|Gerard Schildberger]] ([[User talk:Gerard Schildberger|talk]]) 21:37, 3 April 2014 (UTC)
:We are asked to find the Egyptian fraction with the largest number of terms, finding a solution which matches the task description: 97/53->1+1/2+1/4+1/13+1/307+1/120871+1/20453597227+1/697249399186783218655+1/1458470173998990524806872692984177836808420 but 8/97->0+1/13+1/181+1/38041+1/1736503177+1/3769304102927363485+1/18943537893793408504192074528154430149+1/538286441900380211365817285104907086347439746130226973253778132494225813153+1/579504587067542801713103191859918608251030291952195423583529357653899418686342360361798689053273749372615043661810228371898539583862011424993909789665 using the standard definition for a term in an Egyptian fraction both have 8. The task description causes 97/53 to have an extra term because it is improper, which is nonsense.--[[User:Nigel Galloway|Nigel Galloway]] ([[User talk:Nigel Galloway|talk]]) 14:25, 1 February 2023 (UTC)
 
== Request for task clarification ==
2,172

edits