Talk:Sparkline in unicode: Difference between revisions
→Deeper root of the 'bug' ?
Line 199:
::::: As for our options in the derivation of <code>fencepost_size</code>, the task description leaves this entirely open, as the over-lexicalising tone of your '''"absolutely definitely not"''' XYZ... inadvertently confirms :-)
::::: The only thing that remains is that to avoid misunderstanding and misdirection, I think you '''do''' need to edit your presentation of the test samples above, to clarify that three spark levels for the second one is diagnostic only of the implementation of '''one particular approach''',
::::: It is not inherently diagnostic of a 'bug'.▼
::::: In fact, it's not really clear that the (mathematically perfectly coherent) TCL version contains a '''bug''', any more than fudging the upper boundary condition constitutes a '''bug'''. ▼
▲::::: In fact, it's not really clear that the (mathematically perfectly coherent) TCL version contains
::::: At such extremely low resolution, we can easily generate unfortunate border condition artefacts with '''any''' approach, as long as we choose our sample carefully. [[User:Hout|Hout]] ([[User talk:Hout|talk]]) 09:16, 27 February 2019 (UTC)▼
▲::::: At such extremely low resolution, we can easily generate
==Bar choices==
| |||