Talk:Sierpinski carpet: Difference between revisions
Content added Content deleted
(complain about output example) |
m (agree) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
The specific formatting shown seems unfair to platforms <strike>which aren't J</strike> which don't have built-in table-formatting features, in that it takes a lot of code to generate and is not especially related to Sierpinski. Also, the successive nesting of table borders causes the shape to deviate from the proper fractal (e.g. the outermost holes will be [order] cells in from the corner rather than 1. Because of these, I am going to submit examples which do not use that formatting. --[[User:Kevin Reid|Kevin Reid]] 06:43, 15 March 2008 (MDT) |
The specific formatting shown seems unfair to platforms <strike>which aren't J</strike> which don't have built-in table-formatting features, in that it takes a lot of code to generate and is not especially related to Sierpinski. Also, the successive nesting of table borders causes the shape to deviate from the proper fractal (e.g. the outermost holes will be [order] cells in from the corner rather than 1. Because of these, I am going to submit examples which do not use that formatting. --[[User:Kevin Reid|Kevin Reid]] 06:43, 15 March 2008 (MDT) |
||
:I agree. --[[User:Fr33ke|Fr33ke]] 09:40, 15 March 2008 (MDT) |
|||
Revision as of 15:40, 15 March 2008
The specific formatting shown seems unfair to platforms which aren't J which don't have built-in table-formatting features, in that it takes a lot of code to generate and is not especially related to Sierpinski. Also, the successive nesting of table borders causes the shape to deviate from the proper fractal (e.g. the outermost holes will be [order] cells in from the corner rather than 1. Because of these, I am going to submit examples which do not use that formatting. --Kevin Reid 06:43, 15 March 2008 (MDT)
- I agree. --Fr33ke 09:40, 15 March 2008 (MDT)