Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.c++ > #81052

Re: Detect Math Errors in Functions

Show all headers | View raw

On 9/1/21 4:50 AM, David Brown wrote:
> On 01/09/2021 08:54, Barry Schwarz wrote:
>> On Wed, 1 Sep 2021 07:31:53 +0200, Joseph Hesse <joeh@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> The famous unproven Collatz math conjecture says that if you start with
>>> any positive integer n and generate a sequence by repeatedly apply the
>>> rule that if n is even the next term is n/2, otherwise the next term is
>>> 3*n + 1, then eventually the sequence will reach 1.
>>>
>>> I wrote a C++ function that will generate the sequence from any positive
>>> starting integer, see below, header files omitted.  Since there is
>>> integer arithmetic involved, there might be a math overflow.  How does
>>> one write code to detect math underflow or overflow errors in functions
>>> that do math computations?
>>>
>> In this particular case, it seems to me to be easier to prevent the
>> overflow before it occurs rather than try to detect it after it
>> occurs.  You could replace the previous assignment with
> 
> I agree with that.  I've always preferred the "look before you leap"
> approach, rather than the "close your eyes, make the jump and let
> someone else sweep up the mess" tactic.
> 
> (The rest is to the OP, rather than Barry.)
> 
> Another option is to use gcc's overflow-detecting builtins, or other
> equivalent extensions for other compilers.  If you are trying to do this
> checking as fast as possible, you might be looking at SIMD support
> through compiler vector extensions or processor-specific intrinsics.
> 
> For unsigned types, you can of course just do "y = 3 * x + 1;" and check
> for "y < x", as the overflow is defined as wrapping.
> 
> You would probably also want to use "long long" (or uint64_t), rather
> than "long" (which is 32-bit on some systems), as you want big numbers.
>   You might even want compiler-specific 128-bit types - after all, the
> conjecture is known to be true up to at least 2 ^ 68.
> 
> 
> The conjecture itself is rather interesting.  Here are a couple of
> interesting videos on it (there are many, but these are from reliable
> and interesting sources, to save you from dry lectures or trisectors who
> say they have solved it):
> 

> <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=094y1Z2wpJg>
Coincidence? I watched the video last week, I didn't know about the 
Collatz conjecture until I watched it.

> <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5mFpVDpKX70>
Nice video, thanks!

--
Cholo Lennon
Bs.As.
ARG

Back to comp.lang.c++ | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Detect Math Errors in Functions Joseph Hesse <joeh@gmail.com> - 2021-09-01 07:31 +0200
  Re: Detect Math Errors in Functions Barry Schwarz <schwarzb@delq.com> - 2021-08-31 23:54 -0700
    Re: Detect Math Errors in Functions Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-09-01 09:30 +0200
      Re: Detect Math Errors in Functions Barry Schwarz <schwarzb@delq.com> - 2021-09-01 07:53 -0700
        Re: Detect Math Errors in Functions Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-09-01 17:50 +0200
        Re: Detect Math Errors in Functions James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2021-09-01 12:28 -0400
        Re: Detect Math Errors in Functions Mike Terry <news.dead.person.stones@darjeeling.plus.com> - 2021-09-01 17:38 +0100
    Re: Detect Math Errors in Functions David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-09-01 09:50 +0200
      Re: Detect Math Errors in Functions Mike Terry <news.dead.person.stones@darjeeling.plus.com> - 2021-09-01 16:38 +0100
        Re: Detect Math Errors in Functions David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-09-01 19:25 +0200
          Re: Detect Math Errors in Functions Hope Rouselle <hrouselle@jevedi.com> - 2021-09-06 11:04 -0300
      Re: Detect Math Errors in Functions Cholo Lennon <chololennon@hotmail.com> - 2021-09-06 00:20 -0300
        Re: Detect Math Errors in Functions "Alf P. Steinbach" <alf.p.steinbach@gmail.com> - 2021-09-06 07:23 +0200
          Re: Detect Math Errors in Functions Pavel <pauldontspamtolk@removeyourself.dontspam.yahoo> - 2021-09-06 20:34 -0400
  Re: Detect Math Errors in Functions Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2021-09-01 18:22 +0000
  Re: Detect Math Errors in Functions Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-09-01 21:02 +0200
    Re: Detect Math Errors in Functions David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-09-02 11:53 +0200
  Re: Detect Math Errors in Functions Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-09-01 21:10 +0200
    Re: Detect Math Errors in Functions Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-09-02 05:31 +0200
      Re: Detect Math Errors in Functions Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-09-02 07:51 +0200
    Re: Detect Math Errors in Functions Pavel <pauldontspamtolk@removeyourself.dontspam.yahoo> - 2021-09-06 20:47 -0400
      Re: Detect Math Errors in Functions red floyd <no.spam.here@its.invalid> - 2021-09-06 20:24 -0700
        Re: Detect Math Errors in Functions Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2021-09-08 10:20 +0000
          Re: Detect Math Errors in Functions David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-09-08 13:17 +0200
            Re: Detect Math Errors in Functions Hope Rouselle <hrouselle@jevedi.com> - 2021-09-08 10:24 -0300
      Re: Detect Math Errors in Functions Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-09-07 09:10 +0200

csiph-web