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

Groups > comp.lang.javascript > #27216 > unrolled thread

Best search algorithm to find a condition within a range.

Started byjonas.thornvall@gmail.com
First post2015-04-07 02:43 -0700
Last post2015-04-07 14:33 +0100
Articles 5 on this page of 45 — 6 participants

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.javascript

Contents

  Best search algorithm to find a condition within a range. jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2015-04-07 02:43 -0700
    Re: Best search algorithm to find a condition within a range. "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2015-04-07 13:07 +0200
      Re: Best search algorithm to find a condition within a range. jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2015-04-07 04:38 -0700
        Re: Best search algorithm to find a condition within a range. jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2015-04-07 04:48 -0700
        Re: Best search algorithm to find a condition within a range. "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2015-04-07 14:49 +0200
    Re: Best search algorithm to find a condition within a range. Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-04-07 13:27 +0100
      Re: Best search algorithm to find a condition within a range. jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2015-04-07 06:04 -0700
        Re: Best search algorithm to find a condition within a range. Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-04-07 14:23 +0100
          Re: Best search algorithm to find a condition within a range. jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2015-04-07 06:54 -0700
            Re: Best search algorithm to find a condition within a range. Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-04-07 16:31 +0100
              Re: Best search algorithm to find a condition within a range. jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2015-04-07 08:59 -0700
                Re: Best search algorithm to find a condition within a range. Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-04-07 19:58 +0100
                  Re: Best search algorithm to find a condition within a range. Dr J R Stockton <reply1500@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> - 2015-04-09 23:08 +0100
                    Re: Best search algorithm to find a condition within a range. Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-04-10 00:02 +0100
              Re: Best search algorithm to find a condition within a range. Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-04-07 18:37 +0200
                Re: Best search algorithm to find a condition within a range. jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2015-04-07 09:55 -0700
                  Re: Best search algorithm to find a condition within a range. "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2015-04-07 20:30 +0200
                    Re: Best search algorithm to find a condition within a range. Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-04-07 20:58 +0200
                      Re: Best search algorithm to find a condition within a range. "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2015-04-07 22:19 +0200
                        Re: Best search algorithm to find a condition within a range. jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2015-04-08 00:14 -0700
                          Re: Best search algorithm to find a condition within a range. "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2015-04-08 10:55 +0200
                        Re: Best search algorithm to find a condition within a range. Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-04-09 13:03 +0200
                        Re: Best search algorithm to find a condition within a range. "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2015-04-09 14:11 +0200
                          Re: Best search algorithm to find a condition within a range. "Christoph M. Becker" <cmbecker69@arcor.de> - 2015-04-09 14:55 +0200
                            Re: Best search algorithm to find a condition within a range. "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2015-04-09 15:20 +0200
                              Re: Best search algorithm to find a condition within a range. Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-04-09 14:49 +0100
                                Re: Best search algorithm to find a condition within a range. Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-04-09 16:10 +0200
                                Re: Best search algorithm to find a condition within a range. "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2015-04-09 16:17 +0200
                              Re: Best search algorithm to find a condition within a range. jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2015-04-09 07:22 -0700
                                Re: Best search algorithm to find a condition within a range. "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2015-04-09 16:44 +0200
                                  Re: Best search algorithm to find a condition within a range. jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2015-04-09 07:57 -0700
                                    Re: Best search algorithm to find a condition within a range. jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2015-04-09 08:05 -0700
                                      Re: Best search algorithm to find a condition within a range. Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-04-09 17:04 +0100
                            Re: Best search algorithm to find a condition within a range. Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-04-09 16:14 +0200
                              Re: Best search algorithm to find a condition within a range. "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2015-04-09 16:34 +0200
                                Re: Best search algorithm to find a condition within a range. Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-04-09 17:39 +0200
                                  Re: Best search algorithm to find a condition within a range. "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2015-04-09 18:04 +0200
                                    Re: Best search algorithm to find a condition within a range. Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-04-09 18:26 +0200
                                      Re: Best search algorithm to find a condition within a range. "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2015-04-09 22:13 +0200
                Re: Best search algorithm to find a condition within a range. jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2015-04-07 10:00 -0700
      Re: Best search algorithm to find a condition within a range. jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2015-04-07 06:16 -0700
        Re: Best search algorithm to find a condition within a range. "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2015-04-07 15:28 +0200
          Re: Best search algorithm to find a condition within a range. jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2015-04-07 06:58 -0700
            Re: Best search algorithm to find a condition within a range. "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2015-04-07 20:25 +0200
        Re: Best search algorithm to find a condition within a range. Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-04-07 14:33 +0100

Page 3 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3]

#27225

Fromjonas.thornvall@gmail.com
Date2015-04-07 06:16 -0700
Message-ID<874ae3ae-e2a5-4d00-a7dc-e0b25368d758@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#27221
Den tisdag 7 april 2015 kl. 14:27:36 UTC+2 skrev Ben Bacarisse:
> jonas.thornvall@gmail.com writes:
> 
> > I want todo faster baseconversion for very big bases like base 1 000
> > 000, so instead of adding up digits i search it.
> 
> The size of the base is immaterial, provided that it is in the range for
> which arithmetic operations are exact.  1,000,000 is well within that
> range.
> 
> <snip>
> > <SCRIPT LANGUAGE="Javascript"> 
> > //CONVERT A DECIMAL NUMBER INTO ANYBASE 
> > function newbase(decNumber,base){ 
> 
> Your terms are wrong, and I don't think this is just a trivial detail --
> I think maybe it points to something you've misunderstood.  The value in
> "decNumber" is not decimal -- it's just a number.  Internally it is
> represented in a very well-defined format that uses binary for both a
> fraction and an exponent, but you don't need to care about that.  You
> just want to do arithmetic on it.  (Maybe one day you will write a
> routine like this that takes a bignum in base X and converts it to
> bignum in base Y, but for the moment, you don't seem to be doing that at
> all.)
> 
> Anyway, the algorithm for representing a number in base B is the same
> whatever the base is: the least significant digit is obtained by using
> the remainder operation (%) and you can move on to the next one by
> dividing the number by the base.  I think you know this already.
> 
> <snip>
> -- 
> Ben.

Regarding the terms what terms is wrong?
There ain't no other name for decimal number then a decimal encoded number. Integers are just decimal encoded numbers. If you work in base 8 they are not integers. They are integers because they use 10 unique digits.

And a digit is just one of those unique digit 0-9.
I probably should named digits to digitplace but it was to long.

Digmult is a multiple of the exponent using a specific base at a specific digiplace, so i can hardly name it exponent.

I think i named my variable straightforward.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#27228

From"Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net>
Date2015-04-07 15:28 +0200
Message-ID<XnsA4759D6B449ECeejj99@194.109.133.246>
In reply to#27225
jonas.thornvall@gmail.com wrote on 07 apr 2015 in comp.lang.javascript:

> Integers are just decimal encoded numbers. If you work in base 8 they
> are not integers. 

Wrong.

An integer is a number without a fraction.

An integer can be written in any number base,
not just in base 10, 
but also in base 2 and base 36,
and when the numeric value is the same, 
the integers are the same,
independent of what base notation is used.

-- 
Evertjan.
The Netherlands.
(Please change the x'es to dots in my emailaddress)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#27232

Fromjonas.thornvall@gmail.com
Date2015-04-07 06:58 -0700
Message-ID<1fdc08c8-5d56-4fed-aaf7-b4004eeb7ea1@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#27228
Den tisdag 7 april 2015 kl. 15:28:34 UTC+2 skrev Evertjan.:
> jonas.thornvall@gmail.com wrote on 07 apr 2015 in comp.lang.javascript:
> 
> > Integers are just decimal encoded numbers. If you work in base 8 they
> > are not integers. 
> 
> Wrong.
> 
> An integer is a number without a fraction.
> 
> An integer can be written in any number base,
> not just in base 10, 
> but also in base 2 and base 36,
> and when the numeric value is the same, 
> the integers are the same,
> independent of what base notation is used.
> 
> -- 
> Evertjan.
> The Netherlands.
> (Please change the x'es to dots in my emailaddress)

But javascript will interpretate the number you put in as a decimal encoded number.
Otherwise the answer to x=21+21 would be unknown and not x=42.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#27242

From"Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net>
Date2015-04-07 20:25 +0200
Message-ID<XnsA475CFC9E3066eejj99@194.109.133.246>
In reply to#27232
jonas.thornvall@gmail.com wrote on 07 apr 2015 in comp.lang.javascript:

> Den tisdag 7 april 2015 kl. 15:28:34 UTC+2 skrev Evertjan.:
>> jonas.thornvall@gmail.com wrote on 07 apr 2015 in comp.lang.javascript:
>> 
>> > Integers are just decimal encoded numbers. If you work in base 8 they
>> > are not integers. 
>> 
>> Wrong.
>> 
>> An integer is a number without a fraction.
>> 
>> An integer can be written in any number base,
>> not just in base 10, 
>> but also in base 2 and base 36,
>> and when the numeric value is the same, 
>> the integers are the same,
>> independent of what base notation is used.
> 
> But javascript will interpretate the number you put in as a decimal
> encoded number.

Not "interpretation", 
but "parsing" of string notation ment to be a number, 
but that has nothing to do with what an integer is.

An integer is not defined by the basenumber of the stringy notation.

An integer is a special kind of numeric value,
totally independent of the notation.

> Otherwise the answer to x=21+21 would be unknown and not x=42. 

Nonsense, not "otherwise".

Whay you see is just the parsing of a string, 
not the value of an integer.

This returns an integer too, 
but much larger than 84:

     x = ('' + 21 + 21) * 2;

-- 
Evertjan.
The Netherlands.
(Please change the x'es to dots in my emailaddress)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#27229

FromBen Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk>
Date2015-04-07 14:33 +0100
Message-ID<87k2xoysem.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
In reply to#27225
jonas.thornvall@gmail.com writes:

> Den tisdag 7 april 2015 kl. 14:27:36 UTC+2 skrev Ben Bacarisse:
>> jonas.thornvall@gmail.com writes:
<snip>
>> > <SCRIPT LANGUAGE="Javascript"> 
>> > //CONVERT A DECIMAL NUMBER INTO ANYBASE 
>> > function newbase(decNumber,base){ 
>> 
>> Your terms are wrong, and I don't think this is just a trivial detail --
>> I think maybe it points to something you've misunderstood.  The value in
>> "decNumber" is not decimal -- it's just a number.  Internally it is
>> represented in a very well-defined format that uses binary for both a
>> fraction and an exponent, but you don't need to care about that.  You
>> just want to do arithmetic on it.
<snip>

> Regarding the terms what terms is wrong?
> There ain't no other name for decimal number then a decimal encoded
> number.

There was no hint in the code that the variable named decNumber held
anything other than an ECMAScript value of type Number.  The code did
arithmetic on it using ECMAScript's built in operators that work on
Number values.  In what sense do you think (or, more to the point, care)
that it is "decimal"?

<snip>
-- 
Ben.

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Page 3 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3]

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.javascript

csiph-web