User talk:JusC

From Rosetta Code
Revision as of 02:12, 30 July 2020 by rosettacode>JusC (→‎images)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Twin Prime Conjecture


I changed a bunch of things in the preamble of your newly-entered Rosetta Code task.

First, all new Rosetta Code tasks should be entered as a   draft task   until all the bugs and/or deficiencies are ironed out.   Most Rosetta Code tasks remain in draft status until there is at least four computer programming entries from different authors and there are no significant problems as per the discussion/talk page.   The length of time in draft status depends a lot on what the author feels is a good-enough time and how many entries/solutions have been entered.

Another task requirement is that some authors specifically add the requirement:

                        Show all output here, on this page. 

More whitespace was added as well as the use of subscripts for the identification of the two primes mentioned in the definitions.

Added was a       Task       section header (boldface).

Also added was a       Example       section header (boldface).

I added a       __TOC__       (just for now, so that there is a Table-of-Contents until there are four or more computer programming entries).
(I'll remove the forced table-of-contents later.)

The   under   in the task's requirements was underlined to make it more important   (as opposed to   up to and not including).

Your task requirement of counting the number of twin primes is   counter-exampled   as your examples (instead) show the
number of twin prime pairs   instead of the   number of twin primes.
The number of twin primes below   10   is   3.
The number of twin prime pairs,   however,   is   2.

The examples shown in the preamble should be fixed to agree with the task's requirements,   or,   of course,   the task's requirements could be changed.

This task has the same "problem/issue" as does any task concerning   pairs   of primes.   Consider the limit of   42.
Now,   41   is a twin prime   (and should be counted),   but   43   wouldn't be counted as it isn't under the   42   limit.
As it happens,   when the limit is specified and the twin primes don't bracket the specified limit,   this issue won't be exposed.
But not specifying a bracketed limit doesn't belie that the examples may have that error in their programs.

Also, some task authors like to add a   stretch goal   or   extra credit   task (optional) requirement(s).
You could ask for limits of:     10,000     100,000     1,000,000     10,000,000.

Please feel free to undo any of my changes if you prefer another look-and-feel to the task's preamble.

-- Gerard Schildberger (talk) 08:43, 26 July 2020 (UTC)
Hi, thanks for the help given for creating the task Twin Prime Conjecture. I have made changes including a challenge section and refined the description of the task to ask for the number of pairs of twin primes instead of the number of twin primes in bold.
JusC 12:19, 27 July 2020 (UTC)


Here's what I did for Barnsley_fern#Phix :
output: on imgur

output: [ on imgur]

And here's one I hosted on my own website for Boids#Phix :

Screenshot: []

HTH --Pete Lomax (talk) 01:14, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the suggestion! Is there any way to view the image without redirecting to another site?
JusC 10:22, 28 July 2020 (UTC)
Sadly not as far as I know. I think I would have spotted one by now if that were at all possible. --Pete Lomax (talk) 18:35, 29 July 2020 (UTC)
Ok, thanks for the help!
JusC 10:12, 30 July 2020 (UTC)