Talk:Substring primes: Difference between revisions

''In other words how is (no task -> task) actually any different to (task -> modified task), really?''

::::::: is the quote that I was referring to.   Whether you are dumbstruck or not, isn't the question.   I did and still do not understand why you think that I don't have the ability to comprehend the difference, as I don't feel I should have to enumerate the differences just to answer a nonsensical question, but that isn't germane.   If you can't explain what you meant in that context, and repeating the same text doesn't explain anything.   Your assumption about my understanding is faulty.     -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger|Gerard Schildberger]] ([[User talk:Gerard Schildberger|talk]]) 22:37, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

 

::I object to removing the limit. It invalidates my FreeBASIC solution which, despite being cheeky, illustrates an entirely different approach to the problem; one that does not involve converting to and from strings. [[User:Thebigh|Thebigh]] ([[User talk:Thebigh|talk]]) 15:37, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

 

:::: Yes, exactly.   Removing the limit also invalidated my REXX solution (as well as others), which uses a filtering method instead of a completely different algorithm to generate and validate the possible substring primes.     -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger|Gerard Schildberger]] ([[User talk:Gerard Schildberger|talk]]) 23:19, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

 

:::As I said above, it does not invalidate it in any way. Should a limit of 500 be used it ''will'' still find them all. But if the task says find those under 500, it implies there are more, when in fact there aren't. Still want the limit back? See my suggestion of 13:34 or perhaps if you like you can add "You may be relieved to hear that all such primes are below 500, if that helps." --[[User:Petelomax|Pete Lomax]] ([[User talk:Petelomax|talk]]) 15:58, 7 April 2021 (UTC)