Re: Greatest Common Divisor

[Vik Fearing]

On 20/01/2020 11:28, Dean Rasheed wrote:
> Looking at the docs, I think it's worth going a little further than
> just saying what the acronyms stand for -- especially since the
> behaviour for zero inputs is an implementation choice (albeit the most
> common one). I propose the following:
>
> +       <entry>
> +        greatest common divisor &mdash; the largest positive number that
> +        divides both inputs with no remainder; returns <literal>0</literal> 
> if
> +        both inputs are zero
> +       </entry>
>
> and:
>
> +       <entry>
> +        least common multiple &mdash; the smallest strictly positive number
> +        that is an integer multiple of both inputs; returns
> <literal>0</literal>
> +        if either input is zero
> +       </entry>
>
> (I have tried to be precise in my use of terms like "number" and
> "integer", to cover the different cases)


In that case should lcm be "...that is an integral multiple..." since
the numeric version will return numeric?


Other than that, I'm happy with this change.

-- 

Vik Fearing