Mark Engelberg writes:
> 1.4411518807585587E17 ends in 0,
Oh, my counting was bad yesterday.
> and therefore when you divide by 2, it should end in 5. It's not a
> power of 2, it is a merely an inexact approximation of one.
Yes.
Bye,
Tassilo
--
You received this message because you are sub
1.4411518807585587E17 ends in 0, and therefore when you divide by 2, it
should end in 5.
It's not a power of 2, it is a merely an inexact approximation of one.
On Sat, Jun 2, 2012 at 2:31 AM, Tassilo Horn wrote:
> Yes, you did. How can a power of two divided by two be *odd* (well,
> except for
kawas writes:
> I've checked with a python repl, the correct value seems to be the one
> using BigDecs
>
from decimal import *
Decimal('1.4411518807585587E17') / Decimal(2)
> Decimal('72057594037927935')
>
> I've submitted a bug and commented on it about BigDecimal constructors
> but I
I've checked with a python repl, the correct value seems to be the one
using BigDecs
>>> from decimal import *
>>> Decimal('1.4411518807585587E17') / Decimal(2)
Decimal('72057594037927935')
I've submitted a bug and commented on it about BigDecimal constructors
but I may have made a mistake about
kawas writes:
Hi Laurent,
> (defn prime-factors [n]
> (loop [f 2 n n res []]
> (cond
> (<= n 1) res
> (zero? (rem n f)) (recur f (quot n f) (conj res f))
> :else (recur (inc f) n res
>
> Problem 1 (solved): If you use (= n 1) in the first cond clause, the
> function m
Hi,
Can someone explain to me the behavior of this function when applied
to different kind of numbers.
(defn prime-factors [n]
(loop [f 2 n n res []]
(cond
(<= n 1) res
(zero? (rem n f)) (recur f (quot n f) (conj res f))
:else (recur (inc f) n res
Problem 1 (solved):
