==Mods to task description== I thought we needed the total number of months within the range as well as stating how much to print, as a minimum to allow people to compare different implementations for accuracy. --[[User:Paddy3118|Paddy3118]] 07:27, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

Hi Mike(Mwn3d), the changes I have made have invalidated the Java solution. Have I gone to far? --[[User:Paddy3118|Paddy3118]] 07:41, 23 October 2010 (UTC) :It's already fixed so nope :). --[[User:Mwn3d|Mwn3d]] 15:31, 23 October 2010 (UTC) : FWIW, the task was inspired by this blog post: [http://lovehateubuntu.blogspot.com/2010/10/5-weekends.html http://lovehateubuntu.blogspot.com/2010/10/5-weekends.html] --[[User:Short Circuit|Michael Mol]] 14:52, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

A clarification on task #3 (Show at least the first and last five dates, in order):

Task #1 .. (show ALL months...) which would seem to preclude item #3, unless

task #3 (dates) would've wanted the dates of the first and last five weekends, not just the months.

Since nobody else took my interpretation of "dates", I didn't include that version of a date. [[User:Gerard Schildberger|Gerard Schildberger]]

Item #1 in '''The task''' uses the term "full weekends" meaning Friday+Saturday+Sunday, but it may be misinterpreted to include months with 5 Saturday+Sunday+Monday in the solution (example, October 2011) --[[User:Atnbueno|Antonio Bueno]] 10:02, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

The task should be renamed to 'Five full weekends' --[[User:Walterpachl|Walterpachl]] 13:15, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

==Improve C?== Surely this can be solved without relying on an external command. (For EMBee, by --[[User:Paddy3118|Paddy3118]] 07:01, 6 November 2011 (UTC)). : thanks, but what's wrong with the improve tag? it helps people looking at the language page to see which solutions could be improved. --[[User:EMBee|eMBee]] 08:15, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

::Hi EMBee, you are right. they are using the [http://www.unix.com/man-page/freebsd/1/ncal/ ncal] external Unix command rather than a C library. I didn't look into it enough. I'll revert back to your edit. Sorry. --[[User:Paddy3118|Paddy3118]] 08:28, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

Given Ledrugs' invitation to delete, from his comment on the removal of the improve tag of ''"this example does not need improvement: it was deliberately written so. If you think it's too devious, delete it."'' I am inclined to either leave it with a notice to improve it, or delete it as the solution does not aid language comparison for this straight-forward task. What do others (Including Ledrug), think? --[[User:Paddy3118|Paddy3118]] 03:24, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

: That particular example is centered around using an external program, because there are already like five tasks dealing with weekdays which all do more the less the same thing. There's no point in "improving" it so it becomes yet another redundant solution, if you don't think it serves a purpose, go ahead and delete it. If you want to improve something, go improve the other C example instead, because it likely won't calculate past 2038. As to "aiding language comparison", it's too subjective, and I have no opinion about it. --[[User:Ledrug|Ledrug]] 04:52, 14 November 2011 (UTC) :: the ''improvement'' that i was looking for when adding the tag is achieved by the other C version which doesn't rely on ncal. so i guess the improve tag is no longer needed. however since the solutions used different approaches, i think both can stay.--[[User:EMBee|eMBee]] 06:42, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

:: Sure. +1 --[[User:Paddy3118|Paddy3118]] 09:53, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

==missing sub in "short" REXX program== In the 3^rd REXX example: the '''err''' subroutine seems to be missing. -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger|Gerard Schildberger]] ([[User talk:Gerard Schildberger|talk]]) 01:05, 23 October 2013 (UTC)