Listener 4598

[sunny-dave]

What a splendid puzzle - a worthy commemoration for Waterloo.

Easy (for sure) but lots of fun, involving some cute lateral thinking by the setter.

Very neatly done indeed.

[upsetter]

Great fun but with a few bear traps for the unwary.

We are confused by 34 across - the dates indicate tweaking by the editors.

[IainGrace]

Agreed. A bit different from the norm too, with some lateral thinking needed along the way.

[Semwah]

55 minutes start to finish. Best time yet!

[WessexGirl]

Very clever, but I would have preferred it had the preamble been more obscurely worded, maybe without giving examples. The PDMs would have been more enjoyable, too. Nevertheless, thanks to Waterloo for her/his ingenuity.

[contendo]

Mostly very straightforward though I'm still stuck on a few answers.
Shattered to find N=0 included in the answer to the last numerical after I thought I'd got my first numerical right for ages. I shouldn't think I'm alone.

[Cloverjo]

You’re not alone, Contendo. I accidentally saw on Facebook, just after I’d finished, the correct answer including the zero and was really annoyed with myself.

[Scorpius]

What a pity we won't see any more of Waterloo's quirky puzzles. They were always an interesting diversion from the norm.

[0pt0]

An excellent puzzle. I too was miffed at not realising that 0 could be one of the options for N in last week`s puzzle.

[sunny-dave]

Me too - I'd be spitting tacks if I submitted and was marked wrong.

[Cruncher]

I'm in the N = 1 to 5 camp so that takes the pressure off that elusive all-correct. That said I figured out a few years ago that, gratifying as it might be to get an invite to the annual dinner, the reality of being holed up in a hotel for a weekend with a bunch of people whose only common parlance is crossword clues might be a little overwhelming

[fyellin]

One question about submission. At least one of the symbols is no longer in use and seems to have had multiple representations, quite dissimilar to each other, depending on the symbol's purpose.

Are the checkers lenient? Should I leave a note, just in case I've used one and they expect the other?

[fyellin]

Regarding last week's puzzle, I confess I went to the other extreme. Once I verified for 0 ≤ n ≤ 5, I also checked n = -1. Luckily, Python can be taught to handle fractions, and luckily, the answer was "no" so I didn't bother with n = -2.

[emcee]

I always have enjoyed Waterloo's puzzles; never particularly difficult but always interesting. This one was no exception.

I shall miss this setter's puzzles in the future.

[12barblues]

Well, I didn’t find that as easy as some others - but enjoyed those symbols doing double duty as it were. Typical Waterloo, no clue gimmicks with everything happening in the grid. A pleasing epitaph.

[Hagen]

Classic Waterloo. I agree with Fyellin that there is more than one possibility for some of the symbols, but for me this was a welcome diversion while stranded away from home due to this blasted virus. Sad to learn that the setter is no longer with us