I'm quite new to Programming Puzzles & Code Golf, and my question Calculate all the squares up to x using only addition and subtraction has been closed as a duplicate, who say it's a duplicate of Most optimized algorithm for incrementing squares.
I don't think that my question is a duplicate, as I specifically ask for only addition and subtraction.
Therefore, is there anything I can improve in my question, or is it clearly a duplicate?
Thank you.
The old question has no winning criteria and is ill-defined. My brain raises compilation error trying to understand this sentence of the old question:
Write the "fastest" program to print an incrementing series of squares from a given input to a given input.
Fortunately the provided input/output example make it comprehensible, and this could be salvaged by editing.
The big problem in the old question is that it has no well-defined objective winning criteria, it is just "The entries will be judged on the most efficient algorithm". How do you measure efficiency? Is this algorithmic complexity? What about measuring it for randomized algorithms? What should be done in the case of two tying entries? In my opinion, the old question should be closed as off-topic for lacking an objective winning criteria, but there should be no reason to do this for a 3-year old question, except that it can be used as an excuse to spoil the fun of whoever wants to answer the new question.
Anyway, even if someone comes with a precise definition of the efficiency in the old question, the new question is a code-golf and have different rules on what is permitted to do or not. So, it is likely that most entries in the new question (including the most likely to win) would be invalid in the old question. All the answers in the old question are invalid in the new. This is a strong sign that it is not a duplicate.
I do beleive that your question isn't a duplicate.
The task is a bit different, and the answers aren't the exact same, they are similar, because they use the same algorithm. The whole point of algorithms is to solve many similar tasks.
There is a slight difference between the literal wording of the close reason:
This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.
and the way it is used on this stack and others. The general rule is: a question is a duplicate of another if it naturally gets the same answers. In other words, the second sentence of the message is more significant than the first. On other stacks this is because the point is to guide people to the right answer, and closing with a link to a page which answers their question achieves that goal.
This stack is different, because it's about having fun answering rather than resolving people's uncertainties. However, a similar principle applies. If we already have a page of answers which just need a tiny tweak, what's the point of copying them all across? Maybe it lets people get double points for their answers, but the attention drawn by the closed question pointing at the older one usually gives the better answers a small bump anyway.
In this particular case, your question is closer to the existing one than many which get closed as duplicates on the grounds that existing answers just need a small tweak to solve them. (See e.g. Partition of array).
I should note one exception: when a very general problem has been asked, a more specific instance might be worth keeping open if there is a good reason to expect that the additional structure will allow solutions which aren't applicable to the general problem but are better than the solutions to the general problem.
