Re: Re: union of times algorithm

2002-05-30 Thread Felix Geerinckx
on Thu, 30 May 2002 13:34:32 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Lonewolf) wrote: > Shouldn't the answer be 12? Yes, that's also what I think (and what both Beau's and my solution returned as the answer). -- felix -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PRO

Re: Re: union of times algorithm

2002-05-30 Thread LoneWolf
Shouldn't the answer be 12? >On 30 May 2002 12:41:45 - Felix Geerinckx <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote. >on Thu, 30 May 2002 13:06:04 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Janek >Schleicher) wrote: > >> Sorry, but 3 to 10 are 3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10 = 8 times >> and 15 to 20 are 15,16,17,18,19,20 = 6 times. >> So the