Project Euler Forum

hk wrote:In fact I'm thinking people shouldn't be so nitpickingish about this problem.

Sorry, I honestly wasn't trying to nitpick - I wouldn't have understood the problem without reading the forum, and as far more trivial wording issues have been updated in the past I thought it was worth the 2 minutes to fix - but people can always read the forum if they're confused. Doesn't affect me now anyway having solved it

hk wrote:In fact I'm thinking people shouldn't be so nitpickingish about this problem.

I must say I am disappointed getting such a reaction, whilst only trying to help PE out on some spelling and grammar errors I noticed. To support you, however, I found the wording of the problem clear enough from the start.
Summarizing, I agree with you that people should read better, but in my opinion, this has nothing to do with spelling errors.

What the point is that in the title we had chosen for a certain spelling while the hyperlink was to a text that used another spelling (because it was a text in English). I think it quite normal that in a hyperlink you use the title of the page you are referring to. That does not mean that you can prefer another spelling.
So I don't see why the spelling used in this way should be consistent. (so no spelling error in my opnion).

can peredur stop the process whenever he likes ?

i mean after a sheep bleated and he want to stop he removes all
white sheeps and the process is stoping

That wouldn't be wise of him.

I just wanna clarify something about the problem..

*Deleted the content so as not to give away the solution*

However, when so many people have hit the target and one marksman misses ten times on the run, he/she can hardly shoot his/her own foot and conclude that because the gun is working properly the fault must lie in the target.

Now, since my answer is incorrect I understand am not doing something right. Can someone plz pointout the flaw in my method?

UPDATE: Edited my post since I found the mistake on my own and realized I was giving away most of the solution. Sorry about that.

That's not asking for a clarification, that's posting information that may spoil the problem for others. You'd best edit most of that information out of your post ASAP.

Logically, if you have calculated that a particular strategy does better than the sample case, then your method of calculating the expected number for that strategy is incorrect, regardless of whether or not the strategy is optimal.

Hi, I was just wondering if someone could confirm these values for small input. E(1) = 1, E(2) = 55/24, and E(3) = 1981/528. Let me know if this violates the forum rules, as this is my first time posting on here.

It looks like the link is broken, and the updated link should be https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Mabi ... _of_Evrawc (Guest here is a last name, of the person who wrote this specific english translation).