View source for Talk:Product of decimal digits of n

== why a redirect? ==

Why is this (draft) task being re-directed to a different task?

It is not a duplicate. &nbsp; Anybody can see that the requirements and outputs of the two tasks are vastly different.

The task &nbsp; ''Digital root/Multiplicative digital root'' &nbsp; is a different task with substantially and significant different task requirements. &nbsp; &nbsp; -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger|Gerard Schildberger]] ([[User talk:Gerard Schildberger|talk]]) 20:39, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

:While it might be true to say that [[Digital_root/Multiplicative_digital_root|mdr]] loops while>9, that is not exactly a "substantial" difference (in terms of comparing languages) and hence this does not deserve to be a separate task on rc. <del>Vote for deletion</del>, have removed my Phix entry. --[[User:Petelomax|Pete Lomax]] ([[User talk:Petelomax|talk]]) 22:06, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

:: I took a re-look at my REXX entry (and other language entries) for &nbsp; ''multiplicative digital root'', &nbsp; and in my opinion, &nbsp; there is enough of a difference in most programming languages to deserve so as to justify a separate task. &nbsp; The simpler the task, &nbsp; the easier it is to view the comparisons of the various computer programming languages. &nbsp; There are a lot other Rosetta Code tasks that are far more simpler and/or similar. &nbsp; The various forms of &nbsp; '''do''' &nbsp; loops for instance &nbsp; (that's just my opinion, &nbsp; but I recognize that each small nuance/difference is noteworthy as per each computer language entry). &nbsp; But I don't see the need for deletion because someone labels it a duplicate. &nbsp; I certainly don't want to argue about defining what &nbsp; ''is'' &nbsp; a substantial difference between Rosetta Code tasks. &nbsp; I suppose it's matter of who decides if a Rosetta Code (draft) task is worthy of being kept (or re-directed without a discussion). &nbsp; I also recognize there is a lot here to this particular situation then meets the eye. &nbsp; And I certainly don't want to be the judge if the REXX entry for MDR is way to similar &nbsp; (or not similar) &nbsp; to the REXX entry that was just entered for this Rosetta Code (draft) task. &nbsp; From my viewpoint, the two REXX entries for the two different Rosetta Code tasks aren't really comparable (as per code similarities and objectives). &nbsp; Other computer programming language entries, &nbsp; however, &nbsp; may look more alike to each other, &nbsp; depending on the computer language's semantic sugar. &nbsp; If you don't want to enter a programming language entry for a Rosetta Code task, &nbsp; vote with your feet &nbsp; (just don't create an entry, &nbsp; let someone else write one). &nbsp; &nbsp; -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger|Gerard Schildberger]] ([[User talk:Gerard Schildberger|talk]]) 03:07, 26 June 2021 (UTC)

:::OK, entry restored, vfd retracted. It is no longer a task anyway. --[[User:Petelomax|Pete Lomax]] ([[User talk:Petelomax|talk]]) 03:25, 26 June 2021 (UTC)

:::: It was never a task, &nbsp; it was in &nbsp;''draft''&nbsp; status. &nbsp; The re-direct was added (supposedly as a duplicate task) before there was any discussion at all. &nbsp; Zilch. &nbsp; That by itself, (I suspect) will stop most people from adding new computer programming language entries. &nbsp; I'm still waiting for the deleted (draft) task "similar words" to be re-instated that was removed without as having so much as an discussion. &nbsp; I (also) felt that that Rosetta Code (draft) task has its merits. &nbsp; I also have noted/observed that quite a few people don't add computer programming solutions/entries until a (draft) task has been promoted to full task status. &nbsp; &nbsp; -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger|Gerard Schildberger]] ([[User talk:Gerard Schildberger|talk]]) 19:29, 26 June 2021 (UTC)