On Tue, Apr 7, 2015 at 11:07 AM, <jonas.thornv...@gmail.com> wrote: > Den tisdag 7 april 2015 kl. 18:34:32 UTC+2 skrev Dave Angel: >> Once again, there's no point in doing a search, when a simple integer >> divide can give you the exact answer. And there's probably no point in >> going left to right when right to left would yield a tiny, fast program. >> >> I haven't seen one line of Python from you yet, so perhaps you're just >> yanking our chain. I'm not here to optimize Javascript code. >> >> Using only Python 3.4 and builtin functions, this function can be >> implemented straightforwardly in 7 lines, assuming number is nonnegative >> integer, and base is positive integer. It definitely could be done >> smaller, but then the code might be more confusing. >> >> -- >> DaveA > > So you can tell me the first (higest) digit of the integer > 2932903594368438384328325832983294832483258958495845849584958458435439543858588435856958650865490 > > Using base 429496729?
>>> def to_base(number, base): ... digits = [] ... while number > 0: ... digits.append(number % base) ... number //= base ... return digits or [0] ... >>> to_base(2932903594368438384328325832983294832483258958495845849584958458435439543858588435856958650865490, >>> 429496729) [27626525, 286159541, 134919277, 305018215, 329341598, 48181777, 79384857, 112868646, 221068759, 70871527, 416507001, 31] > How long time did it take to find it? About 15 microseconds. -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
