**⚠️ Warning: This is a draft ⚠️**

This means it might contain formatting issues, incorrect code, conceptual problems, or other severe issues.

If you want to help to improve and eventually enable this page, please fork RosettaGit's repository and open a merge request on GitHub.

==Remove draft status?==

Now that I improved the task description, is this task ready for prime time? --[[User:Smls|Smls]] ([[User talk:Smls|talk]]) 14:47, 5 August 2016 (UTC) : I went ahead and took it out of draft status. --[[User:Smls|Smls]] ([[User talk:Smls|talk]]) 12:35, 20 August 2016 (UTC)

== Scala ==

Could someone in the know please explain these two lines in plain English?

val step2 = step0 filter { sumEq(*) forall { prodEq(*).size != 1 }}

step2 contains the pairs whose product is unique and ??

val step3 = step2 filter { prodEq(_).intersect(step2).size == 1 }

: step2 filters the step0 integer pairs for pairs where "For every possible sum decomposition of the number X+Y, the product has in turn more than one product decomposition" : step3 filters the set defined by step2 for pairs where "The number X*Y has only one product decomposition for which fact 1 is true" : Perhaps the Haskell or JavaScript versions might seem more legible ? [[User:Hout|Hout]] ([[User talk:Hout|talk]]) 17:35, 21 October 2016 (UTC) :: Still not explicit enough :-( Sorry Meanwhile I added 2 translations where I could understand the source (AWK and GO/ --[[User:Walterpachl|Walterpachl]] ([[User talk:Walterpachl|talk]]) 18:54, 26 October 2016 (UTC) ::: Do higher order functions feature in the architecture or traditions of REXX ? If not, the patterns of functional composition used in the Haskell and Scala etc examples may be a little hard to translate all that directly. [[User:Hout|Hout]] ([[User talk:Hout|talk]]) 19:18, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

== A question on GO ==

I translated GO to Rexx and the "final" piece missing for understanding is this:

Why does this justify the removal of the pair p??

Shouldn't the pair a/b be discarded???

```
for a := 2; a < s/2+s&1; a++ {
b := s - a
if products[a*b] == 1 {
// Excluded because P would have a unique product
continue pairs
```

--[[User:Walterpachl|Walterpachl]] ([[User talk:Walterpachl|talk]]) 19:59, 05 November 2016 (UTC) : I think I found the answer myself:-) If ANY of the decompositions of the given pair's sum had a unique product I couldn't be sure that P does NOT know. So all pairs resulting in the given sum could be eliminated not just the one at hand. (They will be later on or have already been...) --[[User:Walterpachl|Walterpachl]] ([[User talk:Walterpachl|talk]]) 05:59, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

== Java program inconsistent with others == It allows the sum to be equal to maximum value. The threshold for a second solution should be X+Y<1866, not 1865.