Hey thanks Thomas You folks are awesome.
cheers dafydd On Dec 21, 2007 4:30 PM, Thomas Grill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi Dafydd, > attached is an archive of a few abstractions and a small Python helper > script which uses the Python decimal module for calculation of large > numbers with py/pyext in pd. > Have a look at test.pd - it's pretty self-explaining. It's been a while > since i used this and i just realized that the re-conversion of the > numbers into pd symbols or lists doesn't deliver all digits for really > large results... but i'm pretty sure this is easy to fix by some > precision argument to the Decimal type (the conversion is in the _.py > script, function any2dec) > > gr~~~ > > PS. I think this requires Python version >= 2.4 > > > Dafydd Hughes schrieb: > > > Thanks for your help, Mathieu and Roman > > > > As it turns out, while I don't want to perform calculations so much, I > > do need to translate these long numbers into rotations in Gem, so I > > need them more or less intact. > > > > Looks like it's Python for the crunching then. > > > > Thanks again! > > > > cheers > > dafydd > > > > On Dec 21, 2007 3:14 PM, Mathieu Bouchard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >> On Fri, 21 Dec 2007, Roman Haefeli wrote: > >> > >> > >>> i assume, you don't want to perform calculations with these big numbers. > >>> or better i should say, i hope, because this wouldn't be possible (at > >>> least with pd on 32bit machines). > >>> > >> Everything is possible. Try this: > >> > >> ruby -e "p 3**33333" > >> > >> If you don't have explicit support for unlimitedly long numbers in a given > >> programming language, you can always add it by yourself in some way, by > >> performing the carries by yourself. For example, it takes N^2 plain > >> multiplications to compute multiplication of two numbers of N digits each, > >> if you do it the obvious way. One such "digit" can actually be a bunch of > >> digits in the base that you'd use if you'd be doing it on paper. For > >> example, Ruby does it using 32 bits as being one "digit" relatively to the > >> way it's done (see also my other mail in this thread). It's best to make > >> it fit with the processor or programming language. If Ruby didn't have it > >> and I wanted to add this feature to Ruby, I'd probably make my digits only > >> 30 bits each or perhaps even 15 bits, for speed and RAM reasons (the way > >> numbers are allocated in the specific case of Ruby). > >> > >> > >> _ _ __ ___ _____ ________ _____________ _____________________ ... > >> | Mathieu Bouchard - tél:+1.514.383.3801, Montréal QC Canada > >> > > > > > > > > > > -- www.sideshowmedia.ca skype: chickeninthegrass _______________________________________________ PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list