Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.javascript > #27427 > unrolled thread
| Started by | jonas.thornvall@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| First post | 2015-04-30 00:11 -0700 |
| Last post | 2015-04-30 10:52 -0700 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 105 — 9 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.javascript
Overflow, integers and strings jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2015-04-30 00:11 -0700
Re: Overflow, integers and strings jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2015-04-30 01:29 -0700
Re: Overflow, integers and strings jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2015-04-30 03:31 -0700
Re: Overflow, integers and strings jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2015-04-30 03:33 -0700
Re: Overflow, integers and strings "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2015-04-30 13:38 +0200
Re: Overflow, integers and strings jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2015-04-30 08:20 -0700
Re: Overflow, integers and strings "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2015-04-30 20:37 +0200
Re: Overflow, integers and strings jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2015-04-30 23:46 -0700
Re: Overflow, integers and strings jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2015-05-01 01:01 -0700
Re: Overflow, integers and strings jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2015-05-01 01:47 -0700
Re: Overflow, integers and strings "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2015-05-01 10:50 +0200
Re: Overflow, integers and strings jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2015-05-01 02:04 -0700
Re: Overflow, integers and strings Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-05-01 11:08 +0100
Re: Overflow, integers and strings jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2015-05-01 04:43 -0700
Re: Overflow, integers and strings jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2015-05-01 04:46 -0700
Re: Overflow, integers and strings "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2015-05-01 10:48 +0200
Re: Overflow, integers and strings Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-05-01 10:58 +0100
Re: Overflow, integers and strings "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2015-05-01 14:34 +0200
Re: Overflow, integers and strings "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2015-05-01 14:47 +0200
Re: Overflow, integers and strings "Christoph M. Becker" <cmbecker69@arcor.de> - 2015-05-01 15:04 +0200
Re: Overflow, integers and strings jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2015-05-01 06:18 -0700
Re: Overflow, integers and strings jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2015-05-01 06:24 -0700
Re: Overflow, integers and strings jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2015-05-01 06:49 -0700
Re: Overflow, integers and strings jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2015-05-01 07:00 -0700
Re: Overflow, integers and strings jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2015-05-01 07:17 -0700
Re: Overflow, integers and strings jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2015-05-01 07:21 -0700
Re: Overflow, integers and strings jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2015-05-01 07:37 -0700
Re: Overflow, integers and strings jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2015-05-01 11:27 -0700
Re: Overflow, integers and strings jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2015-05-01 12:34 -0700
Re: Overflow, integers and strings Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-05-01 22:42 +0200
Re: Overflow, integers and strings "Christoph M. Becker" <cmbecker69@arcor.de> - 2015-05-01 23:37 +0200
Re: Overflow, integers and strings "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2015-05-02 00:19 +0200
Re: Overflow, integers and strings jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2015-05-02 05:50 -0700
Re: Overflow, integers and strings Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-05-02 14:21 +0100
Re: Overflow, integers and strings jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2015-05-03 04:30 -0700
Re: Overflow, integers and strings jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2015-05-03 07:12 -0700
Re: Overflow, integers and strings Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-05-03 16:45 +0100
Re: Overflow, integers and strings jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2015-05-03 09:17 -0700
Re: Overflow, integers and strings jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2015-05-03 09:22 -0700
Re: Overflow, integers and strings jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2015-05-04 03:38 -0700
Re: Overflow, integers and strings Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-05-04 14:01 +0100
Re: Overflow, integers and strings jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2015-05-04 06:41 -0700
Re: Overflow, integers and strings Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-05-04 15:39 +0100
Re: Overflow, integers and strings jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2015-05-04 07:48 -0700
Re: Overflow, integers and strings jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2015-05-04 06:49 -0700
Re: Overflow, integers and strings jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2015-05-04 07:25 -0700
Re: Overflow, integers and strings jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2015-05-04 08:26 -0700
Re: Overflow, integers and strings jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2015-05-04 08:59 -0700
Re: Overflow, integers and strings Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-05-05 00:59 +0100
Re: Overflow, integers and strings Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-05-04 15:28 +0100
Re: Overflow, integers and strings jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2015-05-04 07:34 -0700
Re: Overflow, integers and strings Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-05-04 15:41 +0100
Re: Overflow, integers and strings jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2015-05-04 07:52 -0700
Re: Overflow, integers and strings jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2015-05-04 08:03 -0700
Re: Overflow, integers and strings "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2015-05-04 17:56 +0200
Re: Overflow, integers and strings jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2015-05-04 09:04 -0700
Re: Overflow, integers and strings jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2015-05-04 09:21 -0700
Re: Overflow, integers and strings jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2015-05-04 09:38 -0700
Re: Overflow, integers and strings "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2015-05-04 21:07 +0200
Re: Overflow, integers and strings jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2015-05-04 12:25 -0700
Re: Overflow, integers and strings "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2015-05-04 21:43 +0200
Re: Overflow, integers and strings jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2015-05-04 12:46 -0700
Re: Overflow, integers and strings "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2015-05-04 22:11 +0200
Re: Overflow, integers and strings jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2015-05-04 12:53 -0700
Re: Overflow, integers and strings "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2015-05-04 22:23 +0200
Re: Overflow, integers and strings jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2015-05-04 13:40 -0700
Re: Overflow, integers and strings "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2015-05-04 23:12 +0200
Re: Overflow, integers and strings jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2015-05-04 13:06 -0700
Re: Overflow, integers and strings "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2015-05-04 22:39 +0200
Re: Overflow, integers and strings jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2015-05-04 13:42 -0700
Re: Overflow, integers and strings Scott Sauyet <scott.sauyet@gmail.com> - 2015-05-04 13:40 -0700
Re: Overflow, integers and strings jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2015-05-04 13:47 -0700
Re: Overflow, integers and strings "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2015-05-04 23:30 +0200
Re: Overflow, integers and strings "Christoph M. Becker" <cmbecker69@arcor.de> - 2015-05-04 23:33 +0200
Re: Overflow, integers and strings jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2015-05-04 15:53 -0700
Re: Overflow, integers and strings jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2015-05-04 13:51 -0700
Re: Overflow, integers and strings Scott Sauyet <scott.sauyet@gmail.com> - 2015-05-04 18:00 -0700
Re: Overflow, integers and strings jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2015-05-04 18:22 -0700
Re: Overflow, integers and strings Scott Sauyet <scott.sauyet@gmail.com> - 2015-05-04 21:38 -0700
Re: Overflow, integers and strings jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2015-05-04 18:37 -0700
Re: Overflow, integers and strings jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2015-05-04 14:00 -0700
Re: Overflow, integers and strings jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2015-05-04 09:19 -0700
Re: Overflow, integers and strings "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2015-05-04 21:24 +0200
Re: Overflow, integers and strings wolfgang zeidler <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2015-05-04 21:37 +0200
Re: Overflow, integers and strings "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2015-05-04 21:56 +0200
Re: Overflow, integers and strings jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2015-05-04 13:21 -0700
Re: Overflow, integers and strings wolfgang zeidler <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2015-05-04 22:38 +0200
Re: Overflow, integers and strings "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2015-05-04 22:46 +0200
Re: Overflow, integers and strings "Christoph M. Becker" <cmbecker69@arcor.de> - 2015-05-04 22:57 +0200
Re: Overflow, integers and strings "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2015-05-04 23:17 +0200
Re: Overflow, integers and strings Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-05-05 00:45 +0100
Re: Overflow, integers and strings "Christoph M. Becker" <cmbecker69@arcor.de> - 2015-05-06 00:01 +0200
Re: Overflow, integers and strings Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-05-05 08:14 +0200
Re: Overflow, integers and strings "Christoph M. Becker" <cmbecker69@arcor.de> - 2015-05-05 23:54 +0200
Re: Overflow, integers and strings wolfgang zeidler <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2015-05-04 23:18 +0200
Re: Overflow, integers and strings "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2015-05-04 23:53 +0200
Re: Overflow, integers and strings jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2015-05-04 16:06 -0700
Re: Overflow, integers and strings "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2015-05-05 10:26 +0200
Re: Overflow, integers and strings Dr J R Stockton <reply1500@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> - 2015-05-05 19:59 +0100
Re: Overflow, integers and strings jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2015-05-04 07:40 -0700
Re: Overflow, integers and strings Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-05-05 01:10 +0100
Re: Overflow, integers and strings jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2015-05-01 05:03 -0700
Re: Overflow, integers and strings Ben Bacarisse <ben.lists@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-04-30 20:36 +0100
Re: Overflow, integers and strings jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2015-04-30 13:08 -0700
Re: Overflow, integers and strings Scott Sauyet <scott.sauyet@gmail.com> - 2015-04-30 10:52 -0700
Page 3 of 6 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 Next page →
| From | Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-05-04 14:01 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <87zj5kebta.fsf@bsb.me.uk> |
| In reply to | #27478 |
jonas.thornvall@gmail.com writes: <snip> > This is only an outline / pseudocoe for how the base conversion would > look with bignumb implementation will look. You have to check the > arrays so they contain intergers and not chars, that is probably what > fail in first loop. There is no value in using a bugnum for the base in a bignum implementation. This whole part of the project is a waste of time (unless you just want learn ECMAScript programming but that seems unlikely). <snip> -- Ben.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jonas.thornvall@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-05-04 06:41 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <fa391681-b12a-4a3e-bb1e-d99d537ecc11@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #27479 |
Den måndag 4 maj 2015 kl. 15:01:44 UTC+2 skrev Ben Bacarisse: > jonas.thornvall@gmail.com writes: > <snip> > > This is only an outline / pseudocoe for how the base conversion would > > look with bignumb implementation will look. You have to check the > > arrays so they contain intergers and not chars, that is probably what > > fail in first loop. > > There is no value in using a bugnum for the base in a bignum > implementation. This whole part of the project is a waste of time > (unless you just want learn ECMAScript programming but that seems > unlikely). > > <snip> > -- > Ben. I do not see how you would get away either multiplication or division if the base itself cause overflow. Not that it is implemented to no cause overflow in my implementation right now, but since i do use it for multiplication it do have to be stored in an Array. I am mote into get things work using sticks and stones in a somewhat efficient way, bignumber multiplication, add, and subtraction do work in base 10 for anysize of number. And simply can not cause overflow each operand can be a 1 000 000 digit decimal unsigned string and they still will do their work. Now i just want to make that possible using anybase, as simple as that. And i outlined how it should work. I leave estetical perfection for others, but i like the code readable. And i will make it work doing bignumb arithmetics in anybase, actually it does already work if feed with arrays formatted as required. But it would be nice to be able to feed a bignumb decimal string and get it translated into anybase to do arithmetic upon. Not only integer sized arithmetic in anybase.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-05-04 15:39 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <87ioc8e7a5.fsf@bsb.me.uk> |
| In reply to | #27480 |
jonas.thornvall@gmail.com writes: > Den måndag 4 maj 2015 kl. 15:01:44 UTC+2 skrev Ben Bacarisse: >> jonas.thornvall@gmail.com writes: >> <snip> >> > This is only an outline / pseudocoe for how the base conversion would >> > look with bignumb implementation will look. You have to check the >> > arrays so they contain intergers and not chars, that is probably what >> > fail in first loop. >> >> There is no value in using a bugnum for the base in a bignum >> implementation. This whole part of the project is a waste of time >> (unless you just want learn ECMAScript programming but that seems >> unlikely). > > I do not see how you would get away either multiplication or division > if the base itself cause overflow. Not that it is implemented to no > cause overflow in my implementation right now, but since i do use it > for multiplication it do have to be stored in an Array. The fastest algorithms usually use as large a base as possible without causing overflow for single digit multiplications. <snip> -- Ben.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jonas.thornvall@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-05-04 07:48 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <80b87aea-b304-4d9a-ba36-bab693f2cbb8@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #27485 |
Den måndag 4 maj 2015 kl. 16:39:35 UTC+2 skrev Ben Bacarisse: > jonas.thornvall@gmail.com writes: > > > Den måndag 4 maj 2015 kl. 15:01:44 UTC+2 skrev Ben Bacarisse: > >> jonas.thornvall@gmail.com writes: > >> <snip> > >> > This is only an outline / pseudocoe for how the base conversion would > >> > look with bignumb implementation will look. You have to check the > >> > arrays so they contain intergers and not chars, that is probably what > >> > fail in first loop. > >> > >> There is no value in using a bugnum for the base in a bignum > >> implementation. This whole part of the project is a waste of time > >> (unless you just want learn ECMAScript programming but that seems > >> unlikely). > > > > I do not see how you would get away either multiplication or division > > if the base itself cause overflow. Not that it is implemented to no > > cause overflow in my implementation right now, but since i do use it > > for multiplication it do have to be stored in an Array. > > The fastest algorithms usually use as large a base as possible without > causing overflow for single digit multiplications. > > <snip> > -- > Ben. I think i can make base to not cause overflow, so you can use anybase even outside the integer scope. But first i want my baseconversion to work for bignumb, so it can do the arithmetic up to integer size bases. If i think correct it will handle these bases without overflow, add upto integer/2 base subtract upto integer base multiplication Sqrt integer base
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jonas.thornvall@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-05-04 06:49 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <c2f87900-aeec-4d43-9e53-6968285f9f76@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #27479 |
Den måndag 4 maj 2015 kl. 15:01:44 UTC+2 skrev Ben Bacarisse: > jonas.thornvall@gmail.com writes: > <snip> > > This is only an outline / pseudocoe for how the base conversion would > > look with bignumb implementation will look. You have to check the > > arrays so they contain intergers and not chars, that is probably what > > fail in first loop. > > There is no value in using a bugnum for the base in a bignum > implementation. This whole part of the project is a waste of time > (unless you just want learn ECMAScript programming but that seems > unlikely). > > <snip> > -- > Ben. I can see that the implementation faster multiplying in base 2048 rather than base 2, although it right now cause overflows if number outside integer scope for all bases other than 10. I will fix that though, and that it will becom apparent when multiplying big numbers which approach is faster. Binary base or bignumb base. That is a fact.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jonas.thornvall@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-05-04 07:25 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <a06cd6f3-243a-49f5-822e-168ace8d407e@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #27481 |
Den måndag 4 maj 2015 kl. 15:50:02 UTC+2 skrev jonas.t...@gmail.com: > Den måndag 4 maj 2015 kl. 15:01:44 UTC+2 skrev Ben Bacarisse: > > jonas.thornvall@gmail.com writes: > > <snip> > > > This is only an outline / pseudocoe for how the base conversion would > > > look with bignumb implementation will look. You have to check the > > > arrays so they contain intergers and not chars, that is probably what > > > fail in first loop. > > > > There is no value in using a bugnum for the base in a bignum > > implementation. This whole part of the project is a waste of time > > (unless you just want learn ECMAScript programming but that seems > > unlikely). > > > > <snip> > > -- > > Ben. > > I can see that the implementation faster multiplying in base 2048 rather than base 2, although it right now cause overflows if number outside integer scope for all bases other than 10. > > I will fix that though, and that it will becom apparent when multiplying big numbers which approach is faster. > > Binary base or bignumb base. > > That is a fact. Meanwhile i program outside the box, maybe you could do something you better suited for. Be so kind use mathematica to check if the multiplication correct ;) Timing ms 37 //Not that impressing but it is Javascript afterall 6666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888*77777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777 ==518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518535802469135802469135802469135802469135802469135802469135802469135802469135802469135802469135802469135802469135802469135802469135802469135802469135802469135802469135733333333333333333333328148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148147975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641976
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jonas.thornvall@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-05-04 08:26 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <677e6c6e-2c5d-4f61-b24d-f4cf20f9b5f1@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #27482 |
Den måndag 4 maj 2015 kl. 16:25:36 UTC+2 skrev jonas.t...@gmail.com: > Den måndag 4 maj 2015 kl. 15:50:02 UTC+2 skrev jonas.t...@gmail.com: > > Den måndag 4 maj 2015 kl. 15:01:44 UTC+2 skrev Ben Bacarisse: > > > jonas.thornvall@gmail.com writes: > > > <snip> > > > > This is only an outline / pseudocoe for how the base conversion would > > > > look with bignumb implementation will look. You have to check the > > > > arrays so they contain intergers and not chars, that is probably what > > > > fail in first loop. > > > > > > There is no value in using a bugnum for the base in a bignum > > > implementation. This whole part of the project is a waste of time > > > (unless you just want learn ECMAScript programming but that seems > > > unlikely). > > > > > > <snip> > > > -- > > > Ben. > > > > I can see that the implementation faster multiplying in base 2048 rather than base 2, although it right now cause overflows if number outside integer scope for all bases other than 10. > > > > I will fix that though, and that it will becom apparent when multiplying big numbers which approach is faster. > > > > Binary base or bignumb base. > > > > That is a fact. > > Meanwhile i program outside the box, maybe you could do something you better suited for. Be so kind use mathematica to check if the multiplication correct ;) > > Timing ms 37 //Not that impressing but it is Javascript afterall > > 6666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888*77777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777 > > ==518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518535802469135802469135802469135802469135802469135802469135802469135802469135802469135802469135802469135802469135802469135802469135802469135802469135802469135802469135733333333333333333333328148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148147975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641976 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z3E39c4vd1A
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jonas.thornvall@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-05-04 08:59 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <3bc7bf72-f624-413d-94ac-83f94d8cc46c@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #27491 |
Den måndag 4 maj 2015 kl. 17:26:39 UTC+2 skrev jonas.t...@gmail.com: > Den måndag 4 maj 2015 kl. 16:25:36 UTC+2 skrev jonas.t...@gmail.com: > > Den måndag 4 maj 2015 kl. 15:50:02 UTC+2 skrev jonas.t...@gmail.com: > > > Den måndag 4 maj 2015 kl. 15:01:44 UTC+2 skrev Ben Bacarisse: > > > > jonas.thornvall@gmail.com writes: > > > > <snip> > > > > > This is only an outline / pseudocoe for how the base conversion would > > > > > look with bignumb implementation will look. You have to check the > > > > > arrays so they contain intergers and not chars, that is probably what > > > > > fail in first loop. > > > > > > > > There is no value in using a bugnum for the base in a bignum > > > > implementation. This whole part of the project is a waste of time > > > > (unless you just want learn ECMAScript programming but that seems > > > > unlikely). > > > > > > > > <snip> > > > > -- > > > > Ben. > > > > > > I can see that the implementation faster multiplying in base 2048 rather than base 2, although it right now cause overflows if number outside integer scope for all bases other than 10. > > > > > > I will fix that though, and that it will becom apparent when multiplying big numbers which approach is faster. > > > > > > Binary base or bignumb base. > > > > > > That is a fact. > > > > Meanwhile i program outside the box, maybe you could do something you better suited for. Be so kind use mathematica to check if the multiplication correct ;) > > > > Timing ms 37 //Not that impressing but it is Javascript afterall > > > > 6666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888*77777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777 > > > > ==518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518518535802469135802469135802469135802469135802469135802469135802469135802469135802469135802469135802469135802469135802469135802469135802469135802469135802469135802469135733333333333333333333328148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148147975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641976 > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z3E39c4vd1A If someone have mathematica could they check this one to. INT Mult operations = 1244034 INT Add operations = 1435305 INT Sub operations = 0 INT Borrow operations = 0 INT Carry operations = 667121 Timing ms 239 666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666434343543543543543354354444444444444444444444444444444444444455555555555555555555555555555555555555555555444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444455555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555556666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888*777777777777777777777777777777777377328473284732743274327437432743743874837432432474897545487543754754375475463243643264325435243254325454343756456465436543675436543673643674365436543675548654768549865469857685476547698547654794857487547594754375437543754387547854698547654986548765987469875469854965467854969754678654765865474395439598743574987657659874698754698754687549874398754398754398754398759874359879875498765487668754987549876879875498765987549875439875498754398754754987987545974697548758455784758458375459437543759843754754375943597438543954379543985987435987437548765498743598743987543987597435743597435974397543975439754397543974758475844985748584758475475487548584754754875987458745987449875498754795974598745987498754987498754987498754987549797549875497469875498765497654976987549874359874598743598749875498765975498769875469754765987654987675987598743543987547654987659798769876547675478654987698754987549876567549657695443985437543755476547698546754987437543954354356436754654658746567487654876547545764876548765876458764387658764358764876548763564387587643567436584385486587435687587643643564354532645326453543254632564325453264354327435476456354325432543264537625327537654763254375435476324763532535432763547653265432543275463254327547665376543265743765476532475475437547547354757457457435745747574574357457437547547543757435743574357437545465436574365874365465643654356476545454656475643758643654365764356435643654387654387654687532434637463746346326432764732643264326432643646324664364364326432643264362436246324632463246326346346324636436437777777777777777777374374374327847324734732947324732748327483274832743204327483274832743274327432704327473247777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777 =518518518518518518518518518518518251552315523155162182884958288495829249891621621469235934562600073926674144135989682370343856296053337041242285751756506771081707260436820183072927566924693340522124506360517163198909155410646367899019979490611699983126362388379627461986806024696767241979471117836581895041191472035281897420435885949740359800090885552893519525100748737152273007595485946359469480006821115001044301049670049636130977629239184876760083507305073564275616315286484256158802834598575128888970648678638592980002398812619099329346021145011002347623374771619519687171650101310365346003583673853454628424935627449823004844811379931753263337401855413489146683072976322203909206711887605669269994030523054255663337159964947539102386185898182068749330775992097479715621954495802540022445500780442181289426984933818580669999978260497655857166920583254309106858284886862065468296640069571578603819265060987746447359642747398357911846037822481298509430169476502955033248410141659901461611281615685452518231989183096462465951824361170375274421812061195764516856428742331846618119528833041078252675073358142684646402947312976894046151738143589374335892159082014483670460000716451293084106051518503969167937549084846194870466638783319104862629006256370424738003179677921640465613909635387610298595445311432019163560150870516277063374405228864268180500087460451069462930010291578089250590110868419119845530121183699265721387516890459593845553430461165907144828523504849654349629443656811341359499149672441254878175364232984142370734314239296293940473623774227503024001285501684070073731904581851928714936302401313824086558668080085643233156295752602337620756144409339663534806294853272398071493833458194781756629831652899478977163737637741161308634808877208497959687111562057418715448179177277888536856842970469174105975469264287512538251780024992663089375448547169035188385900862017440474098183981904642803461280969118355595057311078116896667730883403767354998908318665784916075864573696696677243366023347162680796804255972267276267368869181544130060601596470088156885026353096315521635088576983368309025977672842158249243015132944405551666245735682279339036373635840284748471315759012345679012345679457346235165370279248138614723694347165693879152376410968163014963487459857096855412616372345679012345679012345679012345679012345679012345678148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148148147975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641976
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-05-05 00:59 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <87k2wndgrh.fsf@bsb.me.uk> |
| In reply to | #27493 |
jonas.thornvall@gmail.com writes: <snip> > If someone have mathematica could they check this one to. You don't need Mathematica. The Unix/Linx tool 'bc' will do it as will programming languages like Python and Haskell. Perl can do it too, though you need to load a module. You should look for a tool like that for your system so you can test your code. It will be slow work otherwise. <snip> -- Ben.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-05-04 15:28 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <87oam0e7t7.fsf@bsb.me.uk> |
| In reply to | #27481 |
jonas.thornvall@gmail.com writes: > Den måndag 4 maj 2015 kl. 15:01:44 UTC+2 skrev Ben Bacarisse: >> jonas.thornvall@gmail.com writes: >> <snip> >> > This is only an outline / pseudocoe for how the base conversion would >> > look with bignumb implementation will look. You have to check the >> > arrays so they contain intergers and not chars, that is probably what >> > fail in first loop. >> >> There is no value in using a bugnum for the base in a bignum >> implementation. This whole part of the project is a waste of time >> (unless you just want learn ECMAScript programming but that seems >> unlikely). > > I can see that the implementation faster multiplying in base 2048 > rather than base 2, although it right now cause overflows if number > outside integer scope for all bases other than 10. I can't follow this. > I will fix that though, and that it will becom apparent when > multiplying big numbers which approach is faster. > > Binary base or bignumb base. > > That is a fact. What is a fact? Do you think that using a base that is itself a bignum will help in some way? -- Ben.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jonas.thornvall@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-05-04 07:34 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <1a007e67-3a14-424d-b480-c2d909c1f553@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #27483 |
Den måndag 4 maj 2015 kl. 16:28:09 UTC+2 skrev Ben Bacarisse: > jonas.thornvall@gmail.com writes: > > > Den måndag 4 maj 2015 kl. 15:01:44 UTC+2 skrev Ben Bacarisse: > >> jonas.thornvall@gmail.com writes: > >> <snip> > >> > This is only an outline / pseudocoe for how the base conversion would > >> > look with bignumb implementation will look. You have to check the > >> > arrays so they contain intergers and not chars, that is probably what > >> > fail in first loop. > >> > >> There is no value in using a bugnum for the base in a bignum > >> implementation. This whole part of the project is a waste of time > >> (unless you just want learn ECMAScript programming but that seems > >> unlikely). > > > > I can see that the implementation faster multiplying in base 2048 > > rather than base 2, although it right now cause overflows if number > > outside integer scope for all bases other than 10. > > I can't follow this. > > > I will fix that though, and that it will becom apparent when > > multiplying big numbers which approach is faster. > > > > Binary base or bignumb base. > > > > That is a fact. > > What is a fact? Do you think that using a base that is itself a bignum > will help in some way? > > -- > Ben. No the magnitude of the base will help.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-05-04 15:41 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <87d22ge76i.fsf@bsb.me.uk> |
| In reply to | #27484 |
jonas.thornvall@gmail.com writes: > Den måndag 4 maj 2015 kl. 16:28:09 UTC+2 skrev Ben Bacarisse: >> jonas.thornvall@gmail.com writes: >> >> > Den måndag 4 maj 2015 kl. 15:01:44 UTC+2 skrev Ben Bacarisse: >> >> jonas.thornvall@gmail.com writes: >> >> <snip> >> >> > This is only an outline / pseudocoe for how the base conversion would >> >> > look with bignumb implementation will look. You have to check the >> >> > arrays so they contain intergers and not chars, that is probably what >> >> > fail in first loop. >> >> >> >> There is no value in using a bugnum for the base in a bignum >> >> implementation. This whole part of the project is a waste of time >> >> (unless you just want learn ECMAScript programming but that seems >> >> unlikely). >> > >> > I can see that the implementation faster multiplying in base 2048 >> > rather than base 2, although it right now cause overflows if number >> > outside integer scope for all bases other than 10. >> >> I can't follow this. >> >> > I will fix that though, and that it will becom apparent when >> > multiplying big numbers which approach is faster. >> > >> > Binary base or bignumb base. >> > >> > That is a fact. >> >> What is a fact? Do you think that using a base that is itself a bignum >> will help in some way? >> >> -- >> Ben. > > No the magnitude of the base will help. Do you have any evidence for that? What is the optimal base to use? -- Ben.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jonas.thornvall@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-05-04 07:52 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <12b15dea-efc2-4fef-9ff5-d880e6830879@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #27487 |
Den måndag 4 maj 2015 kl. 16:41:46 UTC+2 skrev Ben Bacarisse: > jonas.thornvall@gmail.com writes: > > > Den måndag 4 maj 2015 kl. 16:28:09 UTC+2 skrev Ben Bacarisse: > >> jonas.thornvall@gmail.com writes: > >> > >> > Den måndag 4 maj 2015 kl. 15:01:44 UTC+2 skrev Ben Bacarisse: > >> >> jonas.thornvall@gmail.com writes: > >> >> <snip> > >> >> > This is only an outline / pseudocoe for how the base conversion would > >> >> > look with bignumb implementation will look. You have to check the > >> >> > arrays so they contain intergers and not chars, that is probably what > >> >> > fail in first loop. > >> >> > >> >> There is no value in using a bugnum for the base in a bignum > >> >> implementation. This whole part of the project is a waste of time > >> >> (unless you just want learn ECMAScript programming but that seems > >> >> unlikely). > >> > > >> > I can see that the implementation faster multiplying in base 2048 > >> > rather than base 2, although it right now cause overflows if number > >> > outside integer scope for all bases other than 10. > >> > >> I can't follow this. > >> > >> > I will fix that though, and that it will becom apparent when > >> > multiplying big numbers which approach is faster. > >> > > >> > Binary base or bignumb base. > >> > > >> > That is a fact. > >> > >> What is a fact? Do you think that using a base that is itself a bignum > >> will help in some way? > >> > >> -- > >> Ben. > > > > No the magnitude of the base will help. > > Do you have any evidence for that? What is the optimal base to use? > > -- > Ben. Well doesn't that depend upon the size of number, and the operation. It seem that would for multiplication be Sqrt (number) as base, but that is only what i think.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jonas.thornvall@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-05-04 08:03 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <dbbefb9a-dfc6-40f3-af5a-2d40e2c08e41@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #27489 |
Den måndag 4 maj 2015 kl. 16:52:55 UTC+2 skrev jonas.t...@gmail.com: > Den måndag 4 maj 2015 kl. 16:41:46 UTC+2 skrev Ben Bacarisse: > > jonas.thornvall@gmail.com writes: > > > > > Den måndag 4 maj 2015 kl. 16:28:09 UTC+2 skrev Ben Bacarisse: > > >> jonas.thornvall@gmail.com writes: > > >> > > >> > Den måndag 4 maj 2015 kl. 15:01:44 UTC+2 skrev Ben Bacarisse: > > >> >> jonas.thornvall@gmail.com writes: > > >> >> <snip> > > >> >> > This is only an outline / pseudocoe for how the base conversion would > > >> >> > look with bignumb implementation will look. You have to check the > > >> >> > arrays so they contain intergers and not chars, that is probably what > > >> >> > fail in first loop. > > >> >> > > >> >> There is no value in using a bugnum for the base in a bignum > > >> >> implementation. This whole part of the project is a waste of time > > >> >> (unless you just want learn ECMAScript programming but that seems > > >> >> unlikely). > > >> > > > >> > I can see that the implementation faster multiplying in base 2048 > > >> > rather than base 2, although it right now cause overflows if number > > >> > outside integer scope for all bases other than 10. > > >> > > >> I can't follow this. > > >> > > >> > I will fix that though, and that it will becom apparent when > > >> > multiplying big numbers which approach is faster. > > >> > > > >> > Binary base or bignumb base. > > >> > > > >> > That is a fact. > > >> > > >> What is a fact? Do you think that using a base that is itself a bignum > > >> will help in some way? > > >> > > >> -- > > >> Ben. > > > > > > No the magnitude of the base will help. > > > > Do you have any evidence for that? What is the optimal base to use? > > > > -- > > Ben. > > Well doesn't that depend upon the size of number, and the operation. > It seem that would for multiplication be Sqrt (number) as base, but that is only what i think. I've been thinking again and it probably should have the size of the biggest operand.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-05-04 17:56 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <XnsA490B68534ACEeejj99@194.109.133.246> |
| In reply to | #27487 |
Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> wrote on 04 mei 2015 in comp.lang.javascript: >> No the magnitude of the base will help. > > Do you have any evidence for that? What is the optimal base to use? > The whole exercise seems rather useless indeed, imho. Using different bases is only important for input and output. Doing other arithmetic, say + - *, in different bases than 2 seems just overkill. [integer division can get non-integer results, so such results even cannot be stored in integer arithmetic] Internally [storage and arithmetic] the only logical base is 2. If you need more resolution than javascript can deliver natively, more than 32 bit integer, just define an array of javascript native [= base 2] numbers. Then you would only need to accommodate for that. -- Evertjan. The Netherlands. (Please change the x'es to dots in my emailaddress)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jonas.thornvall@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-05-04 09:04 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <6e347110-81ae-4f1f-b79e-42d15088963c@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #27492 |
Den måndag 4 maj 2015 kl. 17:56:36 UTC+2 skrev Evertjan.: > Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> wrote on 04 mei 2015 in > comp.lang.javascript: > > >> No the magnitude of the base will help. > > > > Do you have any evidence for that? What is the optimal base to use? > > > > The whole exercise seems rather useless indeed, imho. > > Using different bases is only important for input and output. > > Doing other arithmetic, say + - *, in different bases than 2 seems just > overkill. [integer division can get non-integer results, so such results > even cannot be stored in integer arithmetic] > > Internally [storage and arithmetic] the only logical base is 2. > > If you need more resolution than javascript can deliver natively, > more than 32 bit integer, > just define an array of javascript native [= base 2] numbers. > > Then you would only need to accommodate for that. > > -- > Evertjan. > The Netherlands. > (Please change the x'es to dots in my emailaddress) You are a bit close minded Evertjan the base differ the representation of digit places matter. We could do the arithmeric using sums of squares or cubes. The possiblities is endless. But the most important the weight and interpretation of the digiplaces do matter, There is endless arithmeric systems, and everyone i ever accounted is faster than binary. It a bit naive to think that the interpretation of digit places matter when doing arithmeric. At least i feel that way.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jonas.thornvall@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-05-04 09:21 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <7b641090-82e7-4397-8675-5c0f70e7d68f@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #27494 |
Den måndag 4 maj 2015 kl. 18:04:43 UTC+2 skrev jonas.t...@gmail.com: > Den måndag 4 maj 2015 kl. 17:56:36 UTC+2 skrev Evertjan.: > > Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> wrote on 04 mei 2015 in > > comp.lang.javascript: > > > > >> No the magnitude of the base will help. > > > > > > Do you have any evidence for that? What is the optimal base to use? > > > > > > > The whole exercise seems rather useless indeed, imho. > > > > Using different bases is only important for input and output. > > > > Doing other arithmetic, say + - *, in different bases than 2 seems just > > overkill. [integer division can get non-integer results, so such results > > even cannot be stored in integer arithmetic] > > > > Internally [storage and arithmetic] the only logical base is 2. > > > > If you need more resolution than javascript can deliver natively, > > more than 32 bit integer, > > just define an array of javascript native [= base 2] numbers. > > > > Then you would only need to accommodate for that. > > > > -- > > Evertjan. > > The Netherlands. > > (Please change the x'es to dots in my emailaddress) > > You are a bit close minded Evertjan the base differ the representation of digit places matter. We could do the arithmeric using sums of squares or cubes. The possiblities is endless. > > But the most important the weight and interpretation of the digiplaces do matter, > > There is endless arithmeric systems, and everyone i ever accounted is faster than binary. > > It a bit naive to think that the interpretation of digit places matter when doing arithmeric. At least i feel that way. > It a bit naive to think that the interpretation of digit places ***do not*** matter when doing arithmeric. At least i feel that way.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jonas.thornvall@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-05-04 09:38 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <94f9e8a6-1655-4b4b-bd7c-3f39ce25ce6c@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #27496 |
Den måndag 4 maj 2015 kl. 18:21:28 UTC+2 skrev jonas.t...@gmail.com: > Den måndag 4 maj 2015 kl. 18:04:43 UTC+2 skrev jonas.t...@gmail.com: > > Den måndag 4 maj 2015 kl. 17:56:36 UTC+2 skrev Evertjan.: > > > Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> wrote on 04 mei 2015 in > > > comp.lang.javascript: > > > > > > >> No the magnitude of the base will help. > > > > > > > > Do you have any evidence for that? What is the optimal base to use? > > > > > > > > > > The whole exercise seems rather useless indeed, imho. > > > > > > Using different bases is only important for input and output. > > > > > > Doing other arithmetic, say + - *, in different bases than 2 seems just > > > overkill. [integer division can get non-integer results, so such results > > > even cannot be stored in integer arithmetic] > > > > > > Internally [storage and arithmetic] the only logical base is 2. > > > > > > If you need more resolution than javascript can deliver natively, > > > more than 32 bit integer, > > > just define an array of javascript native [= base 2] numbers. > > > > > > Then you would only need to accommodate for that. > > > > > > -- > > > Evertjan. > > > The Netherlands. > > > (Please change the x'es to dots in my emailaddress) > > > > You are a bit close minded Evertjan the base differ the representation of digit places matter. We could do the arithmeric using sums of squares or cubes. The possiblities is endless. > > > > But the most important the weight and interpretation of the digiplaces do matter, > > > > There is endless arithmeric systems, and everyone i ever accounted is faster than binary. > > > > It a bit naive to think that the interpretation of digit places matter when doing arithmeric. At least i feel that way. > > > > It a bit naive to think that the interpretation of digit places ***do not*** matter when doing arithmeric. At least i feel that way. If this one correct i Think we can conclude that add and multiplication work for anysize of number. INT Mult operations = 13893630 INT Add operations = 17261940 INT Sub operations = 0 INT Borrow operations = 0 INT Carry operations = 9521548 Timing ms 2993 666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666434343543543543543354354444444444444444444444444444444444444455555555555555555555555555555555555555555555444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444455555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555556666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888887777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777778*77777777777777777777777777777777737732847328473274327432743743274374387483743243247489754548754375475437547546324364326432543524325432545434375645646543654367543654367364367436543654367554865476854986546985768547654769854765479485748754759475437543754375438754785469854765498654876598746987546985496546785496975467865476586547439543959874357498765765987469875469875468754987439875439875439875439875987435987987549876548766875498754987687987549876598754987543987549875439875475498798754597469754871111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111158455784758458375459437543759843754754375943597438543954379543985987435987437548765498743598743987543987597435743597435974397543975439754397543974758475844985748584758475475487548584754754875987458745987449875498754795974598745987498754987498754987498754987549797549875497469875498765497654976987549874359874598743598749875498765975498769875469754765987654987675987598743543987547654987659798769876547675478654987698754987549876567549657695443985437543755476547698546754987437543954354356436754654658746567487654876547545764876548765876458764387658764358764876548763564387587643567436584385486587435687587643643564354532645326453543254632564325453264354327435476456354325432543264537625327537654763254375435476324763532535432763547653265432543275463254327547665376543265743765476532475475437547547354757457457435745747574574357457437547547543757435743574357437545465436574365874365465643654356476545454656475643758643654365764356435643654387654387654687532434637463746346326432764732643264326432643646324664364364326432643264362436246324632463246326999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999346346324636436437777777777777777777374374374327847324734732947324732748327483274832743204327483274832743274327432704327473247777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777 =51851851851851851851851851851851825155231552315516218288495828849582924989162162146923593456260007392667414413598968237034385629605333704124228575175650677108170726043682018307292756692469334052212450636051716319890915541064636789901997949061169998312636238837962746198680602469676724197947111783658189504119147203528189742043588594974035980009088555289351952510074873715227300759548594635946948000682111500104430104967004963613097762923918487676008350730507356427561631528648425615880283459857509732585488378046236076238063299085667048612436359338910683533479152073626880287989150881781858749383899613531720424781600886381088767230896165264152721939847440463089629074094750314095720716836919933936052826883531449392760436026148886838373802540099326775353592518881100149859004529307378856347628835033129663314231546682063546550674429983096654624743214565993765362925430667756985534386454931961690850430745196253865200105521271984776178823332903531218810016145989025692112687792687792689037668276681610014943348276681001614334334821124822357792655704334667668154458100148779272112598903832237125988989038101576815575308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308641975308659259259259259259259259259259259250360385826080480714738140584925169616971696029363639698541698503192072541430047389603404762758492071429849614341007873898501429454056945168072318342945876389859054194541305479430343035276367637416586143032969850318365169850587483190831923197231947886141305874638752319038752414301500970105652517429521947388086145478861413058746392079476416961947628614295280961947750294448646768823884321957637098182838846081902218911746384756943125100754075337037101422227746715647398633566607026313066008507302061499888551800995161118834052852713641964896166856746299078056489323998011591138006677631418679120716264466838797922754844912522256804996635185041453355536883496823982597131221990067867694720900361174125007572505622567609853964551472683730034488903794631713429509176328631351144738171275103383144039122463009110356745412229454001419176111059885298816043602626695751779071204701708201154338772117585353746281594640932214549702228987558974089899743610748243687873404852317047232296855799205924259092941055261320740998936334100415082544674795299796494829953590209456355756754580771916273630667861111206838942675246913021199480850005249975144591374647446101730876887751082201379080057262046641863511684124190920333324453834295649912559374307985821231371082981102858504253365221863315187039877823984999440075194351229675689507157968649641637713803765977932615026659559689609179917699874879842894156107569132620381504488976568283923049205729239992942179346401865458672571370870509777725296960087658335350039998097414137046876787308533069175249876179145903055866814187987040513428083314519680025110008638970962801644861193633973131699255809618081064353468876408955322270847704506109087082542998035985963050294885551274644274180681269344619133777936844302083010796628983565926973963641871434624002622460037811192254912418111922279237115488457041843715482659375054715594347536489451135531742073050751963961940642737309519840508739762865075371742038408371877541760842750973217543841655087730995321753973219508730953217543976619844206639886210843306550246913580246913580246913580246913580246913580246913580246913580246913580246913580246913580246913580246913580246913580246913580246913580246913580246913580246913580246913580246913580246913580246913580246913580246913580246477811130004537872098765432098765431829829829798811796736735545130068745798569096953934579766606892728548054571524436151153955605022141008374283108995327244225795634674207512636587397174485342393061876213530211745827280062069800286596985440949502039691013514801819462335089482690712507639093459057350186846265132312956405974008347142206002792272709060428715098764983872761598842706495382287150937621598438206604282572709549317715393761598382017153982620842397948684639677530864197530864197441218996764212985743520901874631968764132085765300958986354488683285625859883424118080474814814814814814814814814814814806172840232454701021243464197530864197530864732176621117206676220667095565111761117611176103124834708379128280313037886431264175365373896034160305603627051590515947503380836714517009616140552807305873972552516584996961080730318414295254063651747477192163083252771921636525416986105254143058861410585528075280974859090463491079355246636910802192466357748021924646369108135240219246639246392464021924663437996824412157746885913306019246640219240192417133059133063799713301034467232812219479955282194788372328589997266389997233305903899923932320885652787501217010599677056663875009767634301430389923257499237219478861455010169972566392416990836530590836524169972566391903197241698570541463196774797207930575031920792078785032294767454056585014294545169856517207883656967627873898503230583406119478836278750096772516614118341207280788367392318342950102945406121703417009614609725661451661216763899454967723879434985721277238794301657208343899454168319054127634986121214541460970194303436809700968105898989923661254168587478747947634763476367641700975034375007207697214165854739207281051698503183651698588072147636525405873920725413874721405473880721405999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999854743627696985875061728395061728394972083194295077183274385099405496166294996283296165156517218505518387394294985045406105166172839506172839506172839506172839506172839506172839506172839506172839506172839506172839506172839506172839506172839506172839506172839506172839506172839506172839506172839506172839506172839506172839506172839506172839506172839506172839506172839506172839506172839506172839506172839506172839506172839506172839506172839506172839506172839506172839506
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-05-04 21:07 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <XnsA490D6F3D5A59eejj99@194.109.133.246> |
| In reply to | #27494 |
jonas.thornvall@gmail.com wrote on 04 mei 2015 in comp.lang.javascript: I wrote: >> The whole exercise seems rather useless indeed, imho. >> >> Using different bases is only important for input and output. Integers are just whole numbers, the base in which they are written in, in computer-slang their input and output string, has nothing to do with the integer value. Computations done on them are done on the integer value, and are also independent of the base. > You are a bit close minded Evertjan the base differ the representation > of digit places matter. We could do the arithmeric using sums of squares > or cubes. I am sorry you take the ad hominem approach, but I grant you you have no other help, as your logical arguments fail. "Doing the arithmeric using sums of squares or cubes" is just arithmetic on values and independent of the way they are written. So storing them in different bases is not effective and so not at all sensible. You could also input/output [and even store] integer values in human language, and defining different languages, but you will get into endless problems: twentyfive + dreißig = LV ... while true, I would suggest the the internal computation better be done with values independent of their notation. > The possiblities is endless. This sentense certainly will give you an error, as the operator used here accepts only a singular value on the left. > But the most important the weight and interpretation of the digiplaces > do matter, No, not in computation, only in some forms of notation. In some number notation systems, like old Hebrew, the place of the number- character has no influence on the final value at all, and the characters in fact are just letters with a dot on top. This has it's merits, as integer numbers can be written in readable text, that can be remembered much better than most modern notations. Integers are just values, a subset of all possible numeric values. > There is endless arithmeric systems, This sentense certainly will give you an error in value. > and everyone i ever accounted is faster than binary. Everyone? Not even my fastest neighbour. Indeed binary is not everyone! Even if you mean "encountered" for "accounted", the speed of humans has nothing to do with it. > It a bit naive to think that the interpretation of digit places matter > when doing arithmeric. It is rather silly, indeed it does not, and you seem to admit that here, so silly it must be naive. "interpretation of digit places" does not matter when doing arithmetic on values, and since integers are just values, well we must agree it is naively silly to suppose that. > At least i feel that way. I am so glad you agree with me, Jonas. Will you take the consequences and stop this silly task? -- Evertjan. The Netherlands. (Please change the x'es to dots in my emailaddress)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jonas.thornvall@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-05-04 12:25 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <13d21fd6-1c11-42f2-97e7-f3bbb1ffc523@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #27498 |
Den måndag 4 maj 2015 kl. 21:08:20 UTC+2 skrev Evertjan.: > jonas.thornvall@gmail.com wrote on 04 mei 2015 in comp.lang.javascript: > > I wrote: > >> The whole exercise seems rather useless indeed, imho. > >> > >> Using different bases is only important for input and output. > > Integers are just whole numbers, the base in which they are written in, > in computer-slang their input and output string, has nothing to do with the > integer value. > > Computations done on them are done on the integer value, and are also > independent of the base. > > > You are a bit close minded Evertjan the base differ the representation > > of digit places matter. We could do the arithmeric using sums of squares > > or cubes. > > I am sorry you take the ad hominem approach, but I grant you you have no > other help, as your logical arguments fail. "Doing the arithmeric using sums > of squares or cubes" is just arithmetic on values and independent of the way > they are written. As i suspected you are a bit Clueless about arithmetics, the weight/magnitude of the digitplaces do matter. The more compact you write it the less operations. > So storing them in different bases is not effective > and so not at all sensible. > > You could also input/output [and even store] integer values in human > language, and defining different languages, but you will get into endless > problems: > > twentyfive + dreißig = LV > > ... while true, I would suggest the the internal computation better be done > with values independent of their notation. > > > The possiblities is endless. > > This sentense certainly will give you an error, > as the operator used here accepts only a singular value on the left. > > > But the most important the weight and interpretation of the digiplaces > > do matter, > > No, not in computation, only in some forms of notation. > > In some number notation systems, like old Hebrew, the place of the number- > character has no influence on the final value at all, and the characters in > fact are just letters with a dot on top. This has it's merits, as integer > numbers can be written in readable text, that can be remembered much better > than most modern notations. > > Integers are just values, a subset of all possible numeric values. > > > There is endless arithmeric systems, > > This sentense certainly will give you an error in value. > > > and everyone i ever accounted is faster than binary. > > Everyone? Not even my fastest neighbour. > Indeed binary is not everyone! > Even if you mean "encountered" for "accounted", > the speed of humans has nothing to do with it. > > > It a bit naive to think that the interpretation of digit places matter > > when doing arithmeric. > > It is rather silly, indeed it does not, > and you seem to admit that here, > so silly it must be naive. > > "interpretation of digit places" does not matter when doing > arithmetic on values, and since integers are just values, > well we must agree it is naively silly to suppose that. > > > At least i feel that way. > > I am so glad you agree with me, Jonas. > > Will you take the consequences and stop this silly task? > > -- > Evertjan. > The Netherlands. > (Please change the x'es to dots in my emailaddress)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 3 of 6 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.javascript
csiph-web