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

Groups > comp.lang.javascript > #27660 > unrolled thread

Reverse elements in array, they can be integers or strings.

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

Contents

  Reverse elements in array, they can be integers or strings. jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2015-05-16 02:03 -0700
    Re: Reverse elements in array, they can be integers or strings. jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2015-05-16 02:10 -0700
      MAX_SAFE_INTEGER & MIN_SAFE_INTEGER, was Re: Reverse elements in array, they can be integers or strings. "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2015-05-16 12:03 +0200
    Re: Reverse elements in array, they can be integers or strings. "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2015-05-16 11:37 +0200
      Re: Reverse elements in array, they can be integers or strings. jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2015-05-16 02:58 -0700
        Re: Reverse elements in array, they can be integers or strings. "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2015-05-16 12:22 +0200
          Re: Reverse elements in array, they can be integers or strings. jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2015-05-16 03:44 -0700
            Re: Reverse elements in array, they can be integers or strings. "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2015-05-16 14:52 +0200
              Re: Reverse elements in array, they can be integers or strings. jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2015-05-16 06:09 -0700
                Re: Reverse elements in array, they can be integers or strings. "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2015-05-16 15:30 +0200
        Re: Reverse elements in array, they can be integers or strings. jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2015-05-16 03:37 -0700
          Re: Reverse elements in array, they can be integers or strings. "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2015-05-16 15:00 +0200
            Re: Reverse elements in array, they can be integers or strings. jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2015-05-16 06:24 -0700
              Re: Reverse elements in array, they can be integers or strings. "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2015-05-16 15:54 +0200
                Re: Reverse elements in array, they can be integers or strings. jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2015-05-16 07:01 -0700
                  Re: Reverse elements in array, they can be integers or strings. "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2015-05-16 21:05 +0200
            Re: Reverse elements in array, they can be integers or strings. Denis McMahon <denismfmcmahon@gmail.com> - 2015-05-16 23:07 +0000
              Re: Reverse elements in array, they can be integers or strings. Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-05-17 00:28 +0100
                Re: Reverse elements in array, they can be integers or strings. Denis McMahon <denismfmcmahon@gmail.com> - 2015-05-17 10:37 +0000
                Re: Reverse elements in array, they can be integers or strings. "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2015-05-17 13:34 +0200
        Re: Reverse elements in array, they can be integers or strings. Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-05-16 12:01 +0100
          Re: Reverse elements in array, they can be integers or strings. jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2015-05-16 04:14 -0700
            Re: Reverse elements in array, they can be integers or strings. Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-05-16 13:11 +0100
              Re: Reverse elements in array, they can be integers or strings. jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2015-05-16 06:37 -0700
                Re: Reverse elements in array, they can be integers or strings. jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2015-05-16 06:54 -0700
                  Re: Reverse elements in array, they can be integers or strings. "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2015-05-16 15:58 +0200
                    Re: Reverse elements in array, they can be integers or strings. jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2015-05-16 07:04 -0700
                      Re: Reverse elements in array, they can be integers or strings. "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2015-05-16 21:16 +0200
                    Re: Reverse elements in array, they can be integers or strings. jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2015-05-16 07:51 -0700
                      Re: Reverse elements in array, they can be integers or strings. "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2015-05-16 21:25 +0200
                Re: Reverse elements in array, they can be integers or strings. Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-05-16 21:41 +0100
                  Re: Reverse elements in array, they can be integers or strings. jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2015-05-16 16:51 -0700
                    Re: Reverse elements in array, they can be integers or strings. "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2015-05-17 11:14 +0200
                      Re: Reverse elements in array, they can be integers or strings. jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2015-05-17 03:04 -0700
                        Re: Reverse elements in array, they can be integers or strings. "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2015-05-17 12:40 +0200
                          Re: Reverse elements in array, they can be integers or strings. jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2015-05-17 06:04 -0700
                            Re: Reverse elements in array, they can be integers or strings. "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2015-05-17 21:47 +0200
                              Re: Reverse elements in array, they can be integers or strings. jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2015-05-17 15:06 -0700
                                Re: Reverse elements in array, they can be integers or strings. "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2015-05-18 00:57 +0200
                                  Re: Reverse elements in array, they can be integers or strings. jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2015-05-17 17:10 -0700
                                    Re: Reverse elements in array, they can be integers or strings. "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2015-05-18 13:16 +0200
                            Re: Reverse elements in array, they can be integers or strings. John Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2015-05-18 10:28 +0100
                              Re: Reverse elements in array, they can be integers or strings. Denis McMahon <denismfmcmahon@gmail.com> - 2015-05-18 16:44 +0000
                                Re: Reverse elements in array, they can be integers or strings. jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2015-05-18 10:16 -0700
                              Re: Reverse elements in array, they can be integers or strings. jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2015-05-18 10:13 -0700
                                Re: Reverse elements in array, they can be integers or strings. John Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2015-05-18 19:42 +0100
                    Re: Reverse elements in array, they can be integers or strings. jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2015-05-17 02:58 -0700
              Re: Reverse elements in array, they can be integers or strings. Denis McMahon <denismfmcmahon@gmail.com> - 2015-05-16 22:41 +0000
            Re: Reverse elements in array, they can be integers or strings. "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2015-05-16 15:11 +0200
        Re: Reverse elements in array, they can be integers or strings. John Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2015-05-17 11:27 +0100

Page 2 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3  Next page →

#27671

jonas.thornvall@gmail.com writes:
<snip>
> 21 should encode to [1,10] in base eleven because 11+10.
> But is stored in array as [01,1]
>
> Now i want a printout 1,10

You are still confusing numbers and their representations (or, maybe,
you now understand but have not found a way to write about the
distinction).  Either way, it makes it impossible to communicate about
numbers and their representations.  There is a simple solution:
console.log prints an unambiguous representation of a value.  You could
use that even if you don't fully understand the distinction it's making.
For example, this method will distinguish between a string "[01,1]", an
array of numbers [1,1], and an array of strings ["01","1"].

You seem to be asking how to turn [1,10] into "1,10" but that's too easy
to be the question.

<snip>
-- 
Ben.

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

#27672

Den lördag 16 maj 2015 kl. 13:01:50 UTC+2 skrev Ben Bacarisse:
> jonas.thornvall@gmail.com writes:
> <snip>
> > 21 should encode to [1,10] in base eleven because 11+10.
> > But is stored in array as [01,1]
> >
> > Now i want a printout 1,10
> 
> You are still confusing numbers and their representations (or, maybe,
> you now understand but have not found a way to write about the
> distinction).  Either way, it makes it impossible to communicate about
> numbers and their representations.  There is a simple solution:
> console.log prints an unambiguous representation of a value.  You could
> use that even if you don't fully understand the distinction it's making.
> For example, this method will distinguish between a string "[01,1]", an
> array of numbers [1,1], and an array of strings ["01","1"].
> 
> You seem to be asking how to turn [1,10] into "1,10" but that's too easy
> to be the question.
> 
> <snip>
> -- 
> Ben.

No thar is not the question, i want to reverse the array and reverse the digits of *each element* within array on *decimal level*.

I am doing arithmetic upon the elements so i know they are not stored as characters and strings.

So i *assume* that the element stored at each index within array is an integer.

Really how hard can it be to understand.

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

#27673

jonas.thornvall@gmail.com writes:

> Den lördag 16 maj 2015 kl. 13:01:50 UTC+2 skrev Ben Bacarisse:
>> jonas.thornvall@gmail.com writes:
>> <snip>
>> > 21 should encode to [1,10] in base eleven because 11+10.
>> > But is stored in array as [01,1]
>> >
>> > Now i want a printout 1,10
>> 
>> You are still confusing numbers and their representations (or, maybe,
>> you now understand but have not found a way to write about the
>> distinction).  Either way, it makes it impossible to communicate about
>> numbers and their representations.  There is a simple solution:
>> console.log prints an unambiguous representation of a value.  You could
>> use that even if you don't fully understand the distinction it's making.
>> For example, this method will distinguish between a string "[01,1]", an
>> array of numbers [1,1], and an array of strings ["01","1"].
>> 
>> You seem to be asking how to turn [1,10] into "1,10" but that's too easy
>> to be the question.
<snip>

> No thar is not the question, i want to reverse the array and reverse
> the digits of *each element* within array on *decimal level*.

At some point you will start to take people's advice.  Until then I
don't think you will make much headway.

Show the output from console.log of the array you are starting with.
Then show the output from console.log of the "thing" you want.  I don't
even know if you want a string or an array, and if you want an array, I
don't know what type of elements it should have.  The output from
console.log will make it clear to other what task you are trying to
perform.

> I am doing arithmetic upon the elements so i know they are not stored
> as characters and strings.

OK.  (I note, however, that in one bit of code you once posted you
pointlessly converted them to strings only to immediately re-convert
them back to numbers.  This made me think that, at the time, you did not
know which you had in the array.)

> So i *assume* that the element stored at each index within array is an
> integer.

Since this is your program, you can know what it is.  There should be no
need to assume it.  This makes you statement "stored in array as [01,1]"
very odd.  That looks like an array of two integers, both of which are 1.

> Really how hard can it be to understand.

And how hard is it to do what I ask?  Show the console.log output for
the array you have and then do the same for the string you want to
print.

-- 
Ben.

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

#27680

Den lördag 16 maj 2015 kl. 14:11:27 UTC+2 skrev Ben Bacarisse:
> jonas.thornvall@gmail.com writes:
> 
> > Den lördag 16 maj 2015 kl. 13:01:50 UTC+2 skrev Ben Bacarisse:
> >> jonas.thornvall@gmail.com writes:
> >> <snip>
> >> > 21 should encode to [1,10] in base eleven because 11+10.
> >> > But is stored in array as [01,1]
> >> >
> >> > Now i want a printout 1,10
> >> 
> >> You are still confusing numbers and their representations (or, maybe,
> >> you now understand but have not found a way to write about the
> >> distinction).  Either way, it makes it impossible to communicate about
> >> numbers and their representations.  There is a simple solution:
> >> console.log prints an unambiguous representation of a value.  You could
> >> use that even if you don't fully understand the distinction it's making.
> >> For example, this method will distinguish between a string "[01,1]", an
> >> array of numbers [1,1], and an array of strings ["01","1"].
> >> 
> >> You seem to be asking how to turn [1,10] into "1,10" but that's too easy
> >> to be the question.
> <snip>
> 
> > No thar is not the question, i want to reverse the array and reverse
> > the digits of *each element* within array on *decimal level*.
> 
> At some point you will start to take people's advice.  Until then I
> don't think you will make much headway.
> 
> Show the output from console.log of the array you are starting with.
> Then show the output from console.log of the "thing" you want.  I don't
> even know if you want a string or an array, and if you want an array, I
> don't know what type of elements it should have.  The output from
> console.log will make it clear to other what task you are trying to
> perform.
> 
> > I am doing arithmetic upon the elements so i know they are not stored
> > as characters and strings.
> 
> OK.  (I note, however, that in one bit of code you once posted you
> pointlessly converted them to strings only to immediately re-convert
> them back to numbers.  This made me think that, at the time, you did not
> know which you had in the array.)
> 
> > So i *assume* that the element stored at each index within array is an
> > integer.
> 
> Since this is your program, you can know what it is.  There should be no
> need to assume it.  This makes you statement "stored in array as [01,1]"
> very odd.  That looks like an array of two integers, both of which are 1.
> 
> > Really how hard can it be to understand.
> 
> And how hard is it to do what I ask?  Show the console.log output for
> the array you have and then do the same for the string you want to
> print.
> 
> -- 
> Ben.

I did get your point about using console.log() Ben and i appreciate it.
That join should never been there in the first place. What i wanted to do was to make an integer of the array.

And one can for sure question my approach making even the counter a bignumb.
An ordinary counter would be much faster, but would prevent bases bigger than
9007199254740992.

I do not want to lose speed with my simple naiveAdd() counter, but i also do not want to lose generality of approach, the idea is that it should work for anybase.

Thanks again for pointing out the usefullness of log.console.

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

#27682

Den lördag 16 maj 2015 kl. 15:37:53 UTC+2 skrev jonas.t...@gmail.com:
> Den lördag 16 maj 2015 kl. 14:11:27 UTC+2 skrev Ben Bacarisse:
> > jonas.thornvall@gmail.com writes:
> > 
> > > Den lördag 16 maj 2015 kl. 13:01:50 UTC+2 skrev Ben Bacarisse:
> > >> jonas.thornvall@gmail.com writes:
> > >> <snip>
> > >> > 21 should encode to [1,10] in base eleven because 11+10.
> > >> > But is stored in array as [01,1]
> > >> >
> > >> > Now i want a printout 1,10
> > >> 
> > >> You are still confusing numbers and their representations (or, maybe,
> > >> you now understand but have not found a way to write about the
> > >> distinction).  Either way, it makes it impossible to communicate about
> > >> numbers and their representations.  There is a simple solution:
> > >> console.log prints an unambiguous representation of a value.  You could
> > >> use that even if you don't fully understand the distinction it's making.
> > >> For example, this method will distinguish between a string "[01,1]", an
> > >> array of numbers [1,1], and an array of strings ["01","1"].
> > >> 
> > >> You seem to be asking how to turn [1,10] into "1,10" but that's too easy
> > >> to be the question.
> > <snip>
> > 
> > > No thar is not the question, i want to reverse the array and reverse
> > > the digits of *each element* within array on *decimal level*.
> > 
> > At some point you will start to take people's advice.  Until then I
> > don't think you will make much headway.
> > 
> > Show the output from console.log of the array you are starting with.
> > Then show the output from console.log of the "thing" you want.  I don't
> > even know if you want a string or an array, and if you want an array, I
> > don't know what type of elements it should have.  The output from
> > console.log will make it clear to other what task you are trying to
> > perform.
> > 
> > > I am doing arithmetic upon the elements so i know they are not stored
> > > as characters and strings.
> > 
> > OK.  (I note, however, that in one bit of code you once posted you
> > pointlessly converted them to strings only to immediately re-convert
> > them back to numbers.  This made me think that, at the time, you did not
> > know which you had in the array.)
> > 
> > > So i *assume* that the element stored at each index within array is an
> > > integer.
> > 
> > Since this is your program, you can know what it is.  There should be no
> > need to assume it.  This makes you statement "stored in array as [01,1]"
> > very odd.  That looks like an array of two integers, both of which are 1.
> > 
> > > Really how hard can it be to understand.
> > 
> > And how hard is it to do what I ask?  Show the console.log output for
> > the array you have and then do the same for the string you want to
> > print.
> > 
> > -- 
> > Ben.
> 
> I did get your point about using console.log() Ben and i appreciate it.
> That join should never been there in the first place. What i wanted to do was to make an integer of the array.
> 
> And one can for sure question my approach making even the counter a bignumb.
> An ordinary counter would be much faster, but would prevent bases bigger than
> 9007199254740992.
> 
> I do not want to lose speed with my simple naiveAdd() counter, but i also do not want to lose generality of approach, the idea is that it should work for anybase.
> 
> Thanks again for pointing out the usefullness of log.console.

Well in the end it will of course not be a counter multiplying exponents until the exponent multiple reached.

One must use a divide & conquour search setting min and max, closing in until the digit found.

A counter upto 9007199254740992 would be a long wait to find the right digit ;).
But i feel comfortable i will be able to use 1000 digit bases in the end.

Do arithmetic such as mult and div upon very big numbers.

And that is why i use my naive approach.

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

#27683

jonas.thornvall@gmail.com wrote on 16 mei 2015 in comp.lang.javascript:

> But i feel comfortable i will be able to use 1000 digit bases in the end.

What is a "1000 digit base"?

Bases are values that define the positional value 
of a string-representation of a value.

Do bases have digits? No.

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

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

#27685

Den lördag 16 maj 2015 kl. 15:58:34 UTC+2 skrev Evertjan.:
> jonas.thornvall@gmail.com wrote on 16 mei 2015 in comp.lang.javascript:
> 
> > But i feel comfortable i will be able to use 1000 digit bases in the end.
> 
> What is a "1000 digit base"?
> 
> Bases are values that define the positional value 
> of a string-representation of a value.
> 
> Do bases have digits? No.
> 
> -- 
> Evertjan.
> The Netherlands.
> (Please change the x'es to dots in my emailaddress)

Let me ask you is base 9 a 1 digit base, and is base 10 a two digit base (in base ten)?

If so you should be able to figure out what a thousand=1000 digit base is.

Digits are normally the set of 0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9 if not otherwise specified use of base.

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

#27697

jonas.thornvall@gmail.com wrote on 16 mei 2015 in comp.lang.javascript:

> Let me ask you is base 9 a 1 digit base, and is base 10 a two digit base

No, 
because a base-value is an integer, 
and integers have no base.

Because a base-value is an integer, 
its string-representation van have digits,
but that depends on the base-value you write that in.

> (in base ten)? 

Of cours you can add all kinds of restrictions,
like "the representation of base-values should be written in servo-
croatian", and then perhaps the string-size of base-27 should be 83.

There is no reason to use a base-10 representation for that exclusively.

That does not change the base-value, 
as that is just an integer with only a value and no set base-value itself.

================================

An interesting special case would be if you require the string-represntation 
of the base-value to be written in the base-value itself.

Then any[!] base-value from 1 to infinity
has to be written as the string "10".

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

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

#27686

Den lördag 16 maj 2015 kl. 15:58:34 UTC+2 skrev Evertjan.:
> jonas.thornvall@gmail.com wrote on 16 mei 2015 in comp.lang.javascript:
> 
> > But i feel comfortable i will be able to use 1000 digit bases in the end.
> 
> What is a "1000 digit base"?
> 
> Bases are values that define the positional value 
> of a string-representation of a value.
> 
> Do bases have digits? No.
> 
> -- 
> Evertjan.
> The Netherlands.
> (Please change the x'es to dots in my emailaddress)

Trust me on this Evertjan bases are useless without digits, even unary need one.

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

#27698

jonas.thornvall@gmail.com wrote on 16 mei 2015 in comp.lang.javascript:

> Trust me on this Evertjan 

Discussion is about arguments, trust is about blind faith.

> bases are useless without digits, 

Facts are not measured by their usefulness,
but by their truth and logic.

Number-bases are only needed when you change values into
their string-representations of the postition-value type.

> even unary need one. 

Unary base needs a base? If you say so.

For me that is just a number of dots [or any other sign, like 1].

You just count those dots,
but as their position does not have any significance,
and the base-value defines the position-value,
I would not call that a base.

..... [= 5]

[see, all dots have equal value here]

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

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

#27699

jonas.thornvall@gmail.com writes:

> Den lördag 16 maj 2015 kl. 14:11:27 UTC+2 skrev Ben Bacarisse:
>> jonas.thornvall@gmail.com writes:
<snip>
>> > Really how hard can it be to understand.
>> 
>> And how hard is it to do what I ask?  Show the console.log output for
>> the array you have and then do the same for the string you want to
>> print.
<snip sig -- you should do that yourself>

> I did get your point about using console.log() Ben and i appreciate
> it.

So why have you not done it?  Obviously it makes no difference to me if
you never get an answer to your question about "reversing elements of an
array" but you seem prepared to debate your meaning endlessly rather than
simply providing concrete data about what you want.

<snip>
-- 
Ben.

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

#27704

Den lördag 16 maj 2015 kl. 22:41:27 UTC+2 skrev Ben Bacarisse:
> jonas.thornvall@gmail.com writes:
> 
> > Den lördag 16 maj 2015 kl. 14:11:27 UTC+2 skrev Ben Bacarisse:
> >> jonas.thornvall@gmail.com writes:
> <snip>
> >> > Really how hard can it be to understand.
> >> 
> >> And how hard is it to do what I ask?  Show the console.log output for
> >> the array you have and then do the same for the string you want to
> >> print.
> <snip sig -- you should do that yourself>
> 
> > I did get your point about using console.log() Ben and i appreciate
> > it.
> 
> So why have you not done it?  Obviously it makes no difference to me if
> you never get an answer to your question about "reversing elements of an
> array" but you seem prepared to debate your meaning endlessly rather than
> simply providing concrete data about what you want.
> 
> <snip>
> -- 
> Ben.

I did use it and found a bug, there was string values in the integer array due to my faulthy use of join upon the integers.

So you did help, thank you.

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

#27708

jonas.thornvall@gmail.com wrote on 17 mei 2015 in comp.lang.javascript:

>> So why have you not done it?  Obviously it makes no difference to me if
>> you never get an answer to your question about "reversing elements of
>> an array" but you seem prepared to debate your meaning endlessly rather
>> than simply providing concrete data about what you want.
>> 
>> <snip>

[please do not quote sigantures on usenet. corrected]

> I did use it and found a bug, there was string values in the integer
> array due to my faulthy use of join upon the integers. 
> 
> So you did help, thank you.

You still seem to think a Usenet NG is a helpdesk.

Well, it is not, so if responses help you it is only decent to show how it 
helped, because then you help the group.

We, most of us, are not, I repeat from an earlier posting, into the business 
of blindly believing.

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

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

#27712

Den söndag 17 maj 2015 kl. 11:14:55 UTC+2 skrev Evertjan.:
> jonas.thornvall@gmail.com wrote on 17 mei 2015 in comp.lang.javascript:
> 
> >> So why have you not done it?  Obviously it makes no difference to me if
> >> you never get an answer to your question about "reversing elements of
> >> an array" but you seem prepared to debate your meaning endlessly rather
> >> than simply providing concrete data about what you want.
> >> 
> >> <snip>
> 
> [please do not quote sigantures on usenet. corrected]
> 
> > I did use it and found a bug, there was string values in the integer
> > array due to my faulthy use of join upon the integers. 
> > 
> > So you did help, thank you.
> 
> You still seem to think a Usenet NG is a helpdesk.
> 
> Well, it is not, so if responses help you it is only decent to show how it 
> helped, because then you help the group.
> 
> We, most of us, are not, I repeat from an earlier posting, into the business 
> of blindly believing.
> 


I do not see what there is to beleive from what i stated, 0,1,2,3,4,5,7,8,9 are decimal digits. I stated that my script will use very big bases doing arithmetic on very big numbers.

Where the operands may have million of digits, and the base itself be a 1000 digit number. Janevert had a little hard to understand what a 1 digit base is (1-9) and a two digit base (11-99). A thousand digit base is quite bigger.

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

#27715

jonas.thornvall@gmail.com wrote on 17 mei 2015 in comp.lang.javascript:

> Den söndag 17 maj 2015 kl. 11:14:55 UTC+2 skrev Evertjan.:
>> jonas.thornvall@gmail.com wrote on 17 mei 2015 in comp.lang.javascript:
>> 
>> >> So why have you not done it?  Obviously it makes no difference to me
>> >> if
>> >> you never get an answer to your question about "reversing elements
>> >> of an array" but you seem prepared to debate your meaning endlessly
>> >> rather than simply providing concrete data about what you want.
>> >> 
>> >> <snip>
>> 
>> [please do not quote sigantures on usenet. corrected]
>> 
>> > I did use it and found a bug, there was string values in the integer
>> > array due to my faulthy use of join upon the integers. 
>> > 
>> > So you did help, thank you.
>> 
>> You still seem to think a Usenet NG is a helpdesk.
>> 
>> Well, it is not, so if responses help you it is only decent to show how
>> it helped, because then you help the group.
>> 
>> We, most of us, are not, I repeat from an earlier posting, into the
>> business of blindly believing.
> 
> I do not see what there is to beleive from what i stated,

You did not state, but asked to "BELIEVE ME"!

> 0,1,2,3,4,5,7,8,9 are decimal digits. 

If you mean by "decimal digits" base-10 digits,
that is NOT TRUE. 

In this HTML form input they are just characters in a string. 

They could be processed by Javascript as being base-10, 
but they could be processed as base-37 just as easily.

> I stated that my script will use
> very big bases doing arithmetic on very big numbers. 

So you will have to understand the principles of number processing
and if you wan to discuss it in this discussion list, you will have to use 
the regular mathematical and programmatic terminology/
 
> Where the operands may have million of digits, 

If the operands are numerical values, they don't have digits.

> and the base itself be a 1000 digit number.

No, the base is a integer value, and values don't have digits.

> Janevert 

Extremely impolite to mishandle my name, when prewarned.

>  had a little hard to understand

"had to"? Are you saying what I have to do?

> what a 1 digit base is (1-9)

Nonsensical language, a base has no digits, it is a value.

If you want to think in string-representations of values in other bases than 
10, you will have to forgo your preocupation with the decimal base.

Even better, call it base-A, as all bases are base-10 in their own base.

[Base-1 is realy undefind, since it is not a positional value string,
so has no base to speak of.]

and a two digit base (11-99). A thousand digit base is quite bigger. 

"quite bigger"?????????????

Such "biggerness" of a value is just the value itself, not the amout of 
digits it would have if expressed in a string with positional values.  


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

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

#27718

Den söndag 17 maj 2015 kl. 12:40:36 UTC+2 skrev Evertjan.:
> jonas.thornvall@gmail.com wrote on 17 mei 2015 in comp.lang.javascript:
> 
> > Den söndag 17 maj 2015 kl. 11:14:55 UTC+2 skrev Evertjan.:
> >> jonas.thornvall@gmail.com wrote on 17 mei 2015 in comp.lang.javascript:
> >> 
> >> >> So why have you not done it?  Obviously it makes no difference to me
> >> >> if
> >> >> you never get an answer to your question about "reversing elements
> >> >> of an array" but you seem prepared to debate your meaning endlessly
> >> >> rather than simply providing concrete data about what you want.
> >> >> 
> >> >> <snip>
> >> 
> >> [please do not quote sigantures on usenet. corrected]
> >> 
> >> > I did use it and found a bug, there was string values in the integer
> >> > array due to my faulthy use of join upon the integers. 
> >> > 
> >> > So you did help, thank you.
> >> 
> >> You still seem to think a Usenet NG is a helpdesk.
> >> 
> >> Well, it is not, so if responses help you it is only decent to show how
> >> it helped, because then you help the group.
> >> 
> >> We, most of us, are not, I repeat from an earlier posting, into the
> >> business of blindly believing.
> > 
> > I do not see what there is to beleive from what i stated,
> 
> You did not state, but asked to "BELIEVE ME"!
> 
> > 0,1,2,3,4,5,7,8,9 are decimal digits. 
> 
> If you mean by "decimal digits" base-10 digits,
> that is NOT TRUE. 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Numerical_digit

> In this HTML form input they are just characters in a string. 

Things are what they are regardless use.
lesson one...
> 
> They could be processed by Javascript as being base-10, 
> but they could be processed as base-37 just as easily.

A digit is a digit regardless use.
lesson two...

> > I stated that my script will use
> > very big bases doing arithmetic on very big numbers. 
> 
> So you will have to understand the principles of number processing
> and if you wan to discuss it in this discussion list, you will have to use 
> the regular mathematical and programmatic terminology/

I am not suee i want to discuss the principles of doing arithmetic, thay are of my own, i can discuss my programming errors and techicalities and bugs with you without specify the arithmetic.

Because that will be apparent once it is implemented.
  
> > Where the operands may have million of digits, 
> 
> If the operands are numerical values, they don't have digits.

You are a fool *any number* regardless base is represented by digits.
  
> > and the base itself be a 1000 digit number.
> 
> No, the base is a integer value, and values don't have digits.

You see my arithmetic do not care if i work with strings or integers, because it is highlevel arithmetic, there will be binary operations. But the arithmetic take place on a metalevel.

You are ridiculuous there could be no values, and certainly not arithmetic without digits. We can do base one arithmetic with sets, but the elements still do need a symbolical qualifier so we know they are elements.

> > Janevert 
> 
> Extremely impolite to mishandle my name, when prewarned.
> 
> >  had a little hard to understand
> 
> "had to"? Are you saying what I have to do?

Yes you have.

> > what a 1 digit base is (1-9)
> 
> Nonsensical language, a base has no digits, it is a value.
> 
> If you want to think in string-representations of values in other bases than 
> 10, you will have to forgo your preocupation with the decimal base.
> 
> Even better, call it base-A, as all bases are base-10 in their own base.

Well you seem to have a problem to distinguish between a base and its representation. We could call a group of 5 elements A or Z or X the arithmetic do not care.
 
> [Base-1 is realy undefind, since it is not a positional value string,
> so has no base to speak of.]

If an array represent a set Y=[1,1,1,1,1] would equal 5... I think it is possible to learn 4 years old this level of set theory.
 
> and a two digit base (11-99). A thousand digit base is quite bigger.  
> "quite bigger"?????????????

Well if you want to be precise it is 2^1000-100 bigger, that is quite bigger.

> Such "biggerness" of a value is just the value itself, not the amout of 
> digits it would have if expressed in a string with positional values.  

No if you take the maxvalues for both the bases with 2 digits and bases with 1000 digits.

The difference is 10715086071862673209484250490600018105614048117055336074437503883703510511249361224931983788156958581275946729175531468251871452856923140435984577574698574803934567774824230985421074605062371141877954182153046474983581941267398767559165543946077062914571196477686542167660429831652624386837205668069276.

It is because
10715086071862673209484250490600018105614048117055336074437503883703510511249361224931983788156958581275946729175531468251871452856923140435984577574698574803934567774824230985421074605062371141877954182153046474983581941267398767559165543946077062914571196477686542167660429831652624386837205668069376

Is quite a bigger number than 100.....

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

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

#27722

jonas.thornvall@gmail.com wrote on 17 mei 2015 in comp.lang.javascript:

>> In this HTML form input they are just characters in a string. 
> 
> Things are what they are regardless use.
> lesson one...

So?

>> They could be processed by Javascript as being base-10, 
>> but they could be processed as base-37 just as easily.
> 
> A digit is a digit regardless use.
> lesson two...

Indeed, and a value is a value and has no digits.

 
>> > I stated that my script will use
>> > very big bases doing arithmetic on very big numbers. 
>> 
>> So you will have to understand the principles of number processing
>> and if you wan to discuss it in this discussion list, you will have to
>> use 
>> the regular mathematical and programmatic terminology/
> 
> I am not suee i want to discuss the principles of doing arithmetic, thay
> are of my own, i can discuss my programming errors and techicalities and
> bugs with you without specify the arithmetic. 
> 
> Because that will be apparent once it is implemented.

I am sorry you are not [suee?] sure I suppose.

But you cannot discuss anything without a minimal use of regular 
terminology.
   
>> > Where the operands may have million of digits, 
>> 
>> If the operands are numerical values, they don't have digits.
> 
> You are a fool 

Did you run out of reasonalbe arguments?
Please be polite. 

> *any number* regardless base is represented by digits.

No, not at all. 

Some numeric values can be represented[!] in a string in any number of ways,
and if using the positional system, yes then the base-value has meaning,
but there are many common other ways, like words, ancient Hebrew or Latin 
numbers.

However a numeric value is just a value and "has" NO digits.
 
>> > and the base itself be a 1000 digit number.
>> 
>> No, the base is a integer value, and values don't have digits.
> 
> You see my arithmetic do not care if i work with strings or integers,

Whether you do not care does not mean certain are what they are not.

> because it is highlevel arithmetic, there will be binary operations.

That is no reason, binary computation of lowlevel arithmetic makes just as 
much sense.

> But the arithmetic take place on a metalevel. 

What the hell is a "metlevel"?

> You are ridiculuous there could be no values, 

I never said that there wre no values, or that there could be none.

Only your repeated impoliteness hints at an absense of your values.

> and certainly not arithmetic without digits. 

You are struggeling with my words and adding silly things.

I just said that values have no digits.

> We can do base one arithmetic with sets, 

What the hell are you talking about, what do you mean by "sets"

> but the elements still do need a symbolical qualifier 
> so we know they are elements. 

Ah, the pluralis majestatis!
You must be struggeling.

What elements are you talking about?

What is a "symbolical qualifier" [you must mean "symbolic"] ?

Why is it so important for you to know an element is an element?

Methinks that is obvious.

>> > Janevert 
>> 
>> Extremely impolite to mishandle my name, when prewarned.
>> 
>> >  had a little hard to understand
>> 
>> "had to"? Are you saying what I have to do?
> 
> Yes you have.

I have not. 

How impolite to tell me I have to do anythiing witout proper argumentation.

> 
>> > what a 1 digit base is (1-9)
>> 
>> Nonsensical language, a base has no digits, it is a value.
>> 
>> If you want to think in string-representations of values in other bases
>> than 10, you will have to forgo your preocupation with the decimal base.
>> 
>> Even better, call it base-A, as all bases are base-10 in their own
>> base. 
> 
> Well you seem to have a problem to distinguish between a base and its
> representation. We could call a group of 5 elements A or Z or X the
> arithmetic do not care. 

No, YOU are mixing things up.

A base-value is a value and values have no digints. 

>> [Base-1 is realy undefind, since it is not a positional value string,
>> so has no base to speak of.]
> 
> If an array represent a set Y=[1,1,1,1,1] would equal 5... I think it is
> possible to learn 4 years old this level of set theory. 

The array memebers have lost their positionally dependent value,
they are just a number of straws, dots or one-characters.

So assigning them a base-value, 
that is only significant to define the positional value,  
can be deduced to be useless.
  
>> and a two digit base (11-99). A thousand digit base is quite bigger.  
>> "quite bigger"?????????????
> 
> Well if you want to be precise it is 2^1000-100 bigger, that is quite
> bigger. 

Quite does not go with a comparative in English.

However yours is no argument for your fals claim 
that base-values "have" digits.

>> Such "biggerness" of a value is just the value itself, not the amout of
>  
>> digits it would have if expressed in a string with positional values.  
> 
> No if you take the maxvalues for both the bases with 2 digits and bases
> with 1000 digits. 

Values have no digits, not even base-values.

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

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

#27723

Den söndag 17 maj 2015 kl. 21:48:28 UTC+2 skrev Evertjan.:
> jonas.thornvall@gmail.com wrote on 17 mei 2015 in comp.lang.javascript:
> 
> >> In this HTML form input they are just characters in a string. 
> > 
> > Things are what they are regardless use.
> > lesson one...
> 
> So?
> 
> >> They could be processed by Javascript as being base-10, 
> >> but they could be processed as base-37 just as easily.
> > 
> > A digit is a digit regardless use.
> > lesson two...
> 
> Indeed, and a value is a value and has no digits.
> 
>  
> >> > I stated that my script will use
> >> > very big bases doing arithmetic on very big numbers. 
> >> 
> >> So you will have to understand the principles of number processing
> >> and if you wan to discuss it in this discussion list, you will have to
> >> use 
> >> the regular mathematical and programmatic terminology/
> > 
> > I am not suee i want to discuss the principles of doing arithmetic, thay
> > are of my own, i can discuss my programming errors and techicalities and
> > bugs with you without specify the arithmetic. 
> > 
> > Because that will be apparent once it is implemented.
> 
> I am sorry you are not [suee?] sure I suppose.
> 
> But you cannot discuss anything without a minimal use of regular 
> terminology.
>    
> >> > Where the operands may have million of digits, 
> >> 
> >> If the operands are numerical values, they don't have digits.
> > 
> > You are a fool 
> 
> Did you run out of reasonalbe arguments?
> Please be polite. 
> 
> > *any number* regardless base is represented by digits.
> 
> No, not at all. 
> 
> Some numeric values can be represented[!] in a string in any number of ways,
> and if using the positional system, yes then the base-value has meaning,
> but there are many common other ways, like words, ancient Hebrew or Latin 
> numbers.
> 
> However a numeric value is just a value and "has" NO digits.
>  
> >> > and the base itself be a 1000 digit number.
> >> 
> >> No, the base is a integer value, and values don't have digits.
> > 
> > You see my arithmetic do not care if i work with strings or integers,
> 
> Whether you do not care does not mean certain are what they are not.
> 
> > because it is highlevel arithmetic, there will be binary operations.
> 
> That is no reason, binary computation of lowlevel arithmetic makes just as 
> much sense.
> 
> > But the arithmetic take place on a metalevel. 
> 
> What the hell is a "metlevel"?
> 
> > You are ridiculuous there could be no values, 
> 
> I never said that there wre no values, or that there could be none.
> 
> Only your repeated impoliteness hints at an absense of your values.
> 
> > and certainly not arithmetic without digits. 
> 
> You are struggeling with my words and adding silly things.
> 
> I just said that values have no digits.
> 
> > We can do base one arithmetic with sets, 
> 
> What the hell are you talking about, what do you mean by "sets"
> 
> > but the elements still do need a symbolical qualifier 
> > so we know they are elements. 
> 
> Ah, the pluralis majestatis!
> You must be struggeling.
> 
> What elements are you talking about?
> 
> What is a "symbolical qualifier" [you must mean "symbolic"] ?
> 
> Why is it so important for you to know an element is an element?
> 
> Methinks that is obvious.
> 
> >> > Janevert 
> >> 
> >> Extremely impolite to mishandle my name, when prewarned.
> >> 
> >> >  had a little hard to understand
> >> 
> >> "had to"? Are you saying what I have to do?
> > 
> > Yes you have.
> 
> I have not. 
> 
> How impolite to tell me I have to do anythiing witout proper argumentation.
> 
> > 
> >> > what a 1 digit base is (1-9)
> >> 
> >> Nonsensical language, a base has no digits, it is a value.
> >> 
> >> If you want to think in string-representations of values in other bases
> >> than 10, you will have to forgo your preocupation with the decimal base.
> >> 
> >> Even better, call it base-A, as all bases are base-10 in their own
> >> base. 
> > 
> > Well you seem to have a problem to distinguish between a base and its
> > representation. We could call a group of 5 elements A or Z or X the
> > arithmetic do not care. 
> 
> No, YOU are mixing things up.
> 
> A base-value is a value and values have no digints. 
> 
> >> [Base-1 is realy undefind, since it is not a positional value string,
> >> so has no base to speak of.]
> > 
> > If an array represent a set Y=[1,1,1,1,1] would equal 5... I think it is
> > possible to learn 4 years old this level of set theory. 
> 
> The array memebers have lost their positionally dependent value,
> they are just a number of straws, dots or one-characters.
> 
> So assigning them a base-value, 
> that is only significant to define the positional value,  
> can be deduced to be useless.
>   
> >> and a two digit base (11-99). A thousand digit base is quite bigger.  
> >> "quite bigger"?????????????
> > 
> > Well if you want to be precise it is 2^1000-100 bigger, that is quite
> > bigger. 
> 
> Quite does not go with a comparative in English.
> 
> However yours is no argument for your fals claim 
> that base-values "have" digits.
> 
> >> Such "biggerness" of a value is just the value itself, not the amout of
> >  
> >> digits it would have if expressed in a string with positional values.  
> > 
> > No if you take the maxvalues for both the bases with 2 digits and bases
> > with 1000 digits. 
> 
> Values have no digits, not even base-values.
> 
> -- 
> Evertjan.
> The Netherlands.
> (Please change the x'es to dots in my emailaddress)

Numbers are the result of counting and dividing. A unary set with five members is in a positional numbersystem represented by a digit.

And now i am tired playing this game where you evidently try to prove, where you evidently try to find proof of your own stupidity.

Digits are the positional symbols used in a base in binary they are 0 and 1.

10.34 (written in base ten),

The 0 is immediately to the left of the separator, so it is in the ones or units place, and is called the units digit or ones digit[2][clarification needed];

The 1 to the left of the ones place is in the tens place, and is called the tens digit;

The 3 is to the right of the ones place, so it is in the tenths place, and is called the tenths digit;

The 4 to the right of the tenths place is in the hundredths place, and is called the hundredths digit.  

Now can i go on with the implementation or do you have more silly questions or statements?

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

#27724

jonas.thornvall@gmail.com wrote on 18 mei 2015 in comp.lang.javascript:

> Numbers are the result of counting and dividing. 

Not at all. Numbers are values.

> A unary set with five members 

Here we go again, you make up your own language using English words,
which you use without meaning.

> is in a positional numbersystem represented by a digit. 

Same.

> And now i am tired playing this game where you evidently try to prove,
> where you evidently try to find proof of your own stupidity. 

Waht a stupid remark.

> Digits are the positional symbols used in a base in binary they are 0
> and 1. 

Yes.

> 10.34 (written in base ten),

Or in base-5, or in base-37, but what I see is just a text-string,
needing to be defined. It could be quite something else.
 
> The 0 is immediately to the left of the separator, so it is in the ones
> or units place, and is called the units digit or ones digit[2]

Is it? That depends on the definition. 

"10.34" could be a password-string without any numerical meaning.

> [clarification needed]; 

If you say so.

> The 1 to the left of the ones place is in the tens place, and is called
> the tens digit; 

No it is not, it is what YOU call it.
 
> The 3 is to the right of the ones place, so it is in the tenths place,
> and is called the tenths digit; 
> 
> The 4 to the right of the tenths place is in the hundredths place, and
> is called the hundredths digit.  

No, CERTAINLY NOT!

No, some people, depending on the definition convention in a specical case,
would call it the HUNDREDS digit, between the TENS and the THOUSANDS digit

The HUNDREDTHS digit, as you call it, having 1/100 value steps,
is on the other side of the dot, [or the comma, depending on local 
convention] between the TENTHS and the THOUSANDTHS.

This is all subject to the location dependent numbering system and the base-
value.

However, in a "base-1 system", there is no positional differens between 
them, 
so it is just a collection of straws to be counted, and the idea that that 
has a base is just a ridicule.

> Now can i go on with the implementation

You must be ignorant, stupid and beond hope to think that you can accomplish   
the task you set yourself to, without understanding a thing of number 
theory, of Javascript programming and of mathemetics, and not wanting to 
learn a thing or two.

Don't blame me for wanting to teach you out of compassion. Even if I were 
wrong, quod non, you should have thanked me for my efforts as it was you 
that reached out to this NG for help.

No I don't think you can go on because going on must mean that you get any 
further, and this is not the way to go.

> or do you have more silly questions or statements? 
  
Even if my questions or statements were silly, would that mean that you are 
distracted from your selfinflicted burden by you trying to help me?

What an nice thought would that be.


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

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

#27725

Den måndag 18 maj 2015 kl. 00:57:27 UTC+2 skrev Evertjan.:
> jonas.thornvall@gmail.com wrote on 18 mei 2015 in comp.lang.javascript:
> 
> > Numbers are the result of counting and dividing. 
> 
> Not at all. Numbers are values.
> 
> > A unary set with five members 
> 
> Here we go again, you make up your own language using English words,
> which you use without meaning.
> 
> > is in a positional numbersystem represented by a digit. 
> 
> Same.
> 
> > And now i am tired playing this game where you evidently try to prove,
> > where you evidently try to find proof of your own stupidity. 
> 
> Waht a stupid remark.
> 
> > Digits are the positional symbols used in a base in binary they are 0
> > and 1. 
> 
> Yes.
> 
> > 10.34 (written in base ten),
> 
> Or in base-5, or in base-37, but what I see is just a text-string,
> needing to be defined. It could be quite something else.
>  
> > The 0 is immediately to the left of the separator, so it is in the ones
> > or units place, and is called the units digit or ones digit[2]
> 
> Is it? That depends on the definition. 
> 
> "10.34" could be a password-string without any numerical meaning.
> 
> > [clarification needed]; 
> 
> If you say so.
> 
> > The 1 to the left of the ones place is in the tens place, and is called
> > the tens digit; 
> 
> No it is not, it is what YOU call it.
>  
> > The 3 is to the right of the ones place, so it is in the tenths place,
> > and is called the tenths digit; 
> > 
> > The 4 to the right of the tenths place is in the hundredths place, and
> > is called the hundredths digit.  
> 
> No, CERTAINLY NOT!

Good it all was copied from Wikipedia so now you can go on argue with them.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Numerical_digit

I am really not interested in a merry go round about nothing than you making a fool of yourself. But i will do arithnetic on very big numbers using very big bases. Well i can do it on very small to.

But i am not even sure partitioning whole numbers within respective base is a good idea. I prefer sums of fractions.

> No, some people, depending on the definition convention in a specical case,
> would call it the HUNDREDS digit, between the TENS and the THOUSANDS digit
> 
> The HUNDREDTHS digit, as you call it, having 1/100 value steps,
> is on the other side of the dot, [or the comma, depending on local 
> convention] between the TENTHS and the THOUSANDTHS.
> 
> This is all subject to the location dependent numbering system and the base-
> value.
> 
> However, in a "base-1 system", there is no positional differens between 
> them, 
> so it is just a collection of straws to be counted, and the idea that that 
> has a base is just a ridicule.
> 
> > Now can i go on with the implementation
> 
> You must be ignorant, stupid and beond hope to think that you can accomplish   
> the task you set yourself to, without understanding a thing of number 
> theory, of Javascript programming and of mathemetics, and not wanting to 
> learn a thing or two.
> 
> Don't blame me for wanting to teach you out of compassion. Even if I were 
> wrong, quod non, you should have thanked me for my efforts as it was you 
> that reached out to this NG for help.
> 
> No I don't think you can go on because going on must mean that you get any 
> further, and this is not the way to go.
> 
> > or do you have more silly questions or statements? 
>   
> Even if my questions or statements were silly, would that mean that you are 
> distracted from your selfinflicted burden by you trying to help me?
> 
> What an nice thought would that be.
> 
> 
> -- 
> Evertjan.
> The Netherlands.
> (Please change the x'es to dots in my emailaddress)

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

Page 2 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3  Next page →

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

csiph-web