Talk:Prime conspiracy: Difference between revisions

Content added Content deleted
(→‎Propose change in output format: added comments and a vote.)
Line 95: Line 95:


:: The phrase   "10000 first primes"   now isn't quite true, as some (low) primes are ignored to "simplify" things.   I find the output (above) less intuitive than a straight/simple vertical list (and with no lower limits on what primes are chosen).   And the comment (below) about magnifying the code size and complexity shouldn't to be taken lightly.   I see the requirement to use a horizontal format that will be mucking up the task's clarity and brevity.   People can read and comprehend a vertical list a lot better than a horizontal list, even though the horizontal list is shorter (as far as vertical spacing goes).   I vote '''no''', as readability is more important (in my eyen).   -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger|Gerard Schildberger]] ([[User talk:Gerard Schildberger|talk]]) 20:11, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
:: The phrase   "10000 first primes"   now isn't quite true, as some (low) primes are ignored to "simplify" things.   I find the output (above) less intuitive than a straight/simple vertical list (and with no lower limits on what primes are chosen).   And the comment (below) about magnifying the code size and complexity shouldn't to be taken lightly.   I see the requirement to use a horizontal format that will be mucking up the task's clarity and brevity.   People can read and comprehend a vertical list a lot better than a horizontal list, even though the horizontal list is shorter (as far as vertical spacing goes).   I vote '''no''', as readability is more important (in my eyen).   -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger|Gerard Schildberger]] ([[User talk:Gerard Schildberger|talk]]) 20:11, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

::: '''no''' vote recorded. About low primes, we could reword it as "10000 first primes above 5 (or 10)".
::: Personally, I'm lost in the vertical output; with the table I can easily follow the diagonal. -- [[User:WillNess|WillNess]] ([[User talk:WillNess|talk]]) 20:30, 16 September 2016 (UTC)


This way the results are much more visually apparent. -- [[User:WillNess|WillNess]] ([[User talk:WillNess|talk]]) 13:02, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
This way the results are much more visually apparent. -- [[User:WillNess|WillNess]] ([[User talk:WillNess|talk]]) 13:02, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
Line 113: Line 116:


:::::: Updated votes: YES: 1, NO: 0, ABSTAIN: 1. -- [[User:WillNess|WillNess]] ([[User talk:WillNess|talk]]) 19:49, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
:::::: Updated votes: YES: 1, NO: 0, ABSTAIN: 1. -- [[User:WillNess|WillNess]] ([[User talk:WillNess|talk]]) 19:49, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

:::::: Updated votes: YES: 1, NO: 1, ABSTAIN: 1. -- [[User:WillNess|WillNess]] ([[User talk:WillNess|talk]]) 20:30, 16 September 2016 (UTC)