Talk:Minimum number of cells after, before, above and below NxN squares: Difference between revisions
Talk:Minimum number of cells after, before, above and below NxN squares (view source)
Revision as of 15:30, 19 January 2023
, 1 year agono edit summary
(maybe we can improve the task description?) |
No edit summary |
||
| (5 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown) | |||
Line 6:
So I'm wondering if we can't make the task description a little less ambiguous by rephrasing. (But I'm not completely convinced here that my second paragraph, above, is actually any clearer. Does anyone have strong opinions here?) --[[User:Rdm|Rdm]] ([[User talk:Rdm|talk]]) 19:35, 18 January 2023 (UTC)
: I don't really feel strongly about it but [[Minimum_number_of_cells_after,_before,_above_and_below_NxN_squares#Raku|my interpretation]] was that each cell should contain "the distance to the nearest edge". Which seemed a lot less convoluted to me. --[[User:Thundergnat|Thundergnat]] ([[User talk:Thundergnat|talk]]) 22:06, 18 January 2023 (UTC)
:: I wonder if "the nearest" edge is well defined ? (There may be 2, or 4, of them).
:: Perhaps "minimum distance to an edge" (rather than implying a search for a particular edge) ?
:: (but as you say, not much turns on it) [[User:Hout|Hout]] ([[User talk:Hout|talk]]) 08:32, 19 January 2023 (UTC)
:::"Find and show on this page the minimum <b>of:</b> the number of cells after<b>;</b> before<b>;</b> above<b>;</b> and below <b>an</b> N×N square. where N = 10.". If N is fixed then perhaps NxN should be 10x10, if it is not meant to be fixed then perhaps a procedure to find ... with examples to include even and odd N. Perhaps NxG would be more interesting.--[[User:Nigel Galloway|Nigel Galloway]] ([[User talk:Nigel Galloway|talk]]) 15:24, 19 January 2023 (UTC)
| |||