Anonymous user
Talk:Mayan numerals: Difference between revisions
→The 'unique' keyword: added some comments.
m (→The 'default' keyword: added verbiage for the "unique" word (and it's meaning in this context).) |
(→The 'unique' keyword: added some comments.) |
||
| (4 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
Line 93:
:::I wonder if pinning down the font used for the numbers and arrows would help ? Defaults may differ [[User:Hout|Hout]] ([[User talk:Hout|talk]]) 23:47, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
:::: All characters used in the task preamble (and above), and for the REXX solution are from the Microsoft DOS (prompt) screen, the code page used is '''437'''. -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger|Gerard Schildberger]] ([[User talk:Gerard Schildberger|talk]]) 23:32, 15 January 2019 (UTC)
==The 'default' keyword==▼
In the change log I notice that you have written 'added underlining to the unique keyword, most people are missing that point'. I wonder if there is another way of expressing what you are after ? Readers might be forgiven for thinking that all numbers are equally 'unique'. Or are some a little less unique than others ? [[User:Hout|Hout]] ([[User talk:Hout|talk]]) 23:47, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
: I was attempting to use the word '''unique''' as in to provide/display a unique Mayan number different from any other number chosen by other people when displaying an example number. Saying it this way seemed a bit too wordy. I don't disagree that all numbers are unique (but the Mayan numbers displayed are (from other people's numbers). I was thinking that in the context, the number used for their computer programming language example would be distinct from any other example used for this Rosetta Code task. But, I won't complain or flag that some people choose to copy/re-use another person's unique number. -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger|Gerard Schildberger]] ([[User talk:Gerard Schildberger|talk]]) 00:07, 15 January 2019 (UTC)
:: Got it – a number not shown in any of the other language contributions.
:: (A reward for early birds ? The processing cost will progressively rise for late-comers, as each of them checks all existing contributions :-) [[User:Hout|Hout]] ([[User talk:Hout|talk]]) 13:25, 15 January 2019 (UTC)
::: Not necessarily. I could've added more unique contributions without having to check other entries, but it wouldn't take much scrolling. It's "thinking outside of the box", whether it be Morse code, palindromes, step structures, a Mayan number resembling a (simple) fractal, eggs and dots, something that looks rather like a sine wave, ... the sky's the limit. I thought it would be a fun requirement. Cheap thrills and/or entertainment. -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger|Gerard Schildberger]] ([[User talk:Gerard Schildberger|talk]]) 00:20, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
| |||