On Tue, May 17, 2022 at 12:23 PM 'Viktor Grigorov' via Programming
wrote:
> I get domain errors for most of the values above 1e_11
Oh... I hadn't actually tried it. (Oops.)
I guess this is because of the non-obvious consequences which
typically result from using larger tolerance values.
That s
I get domain errors for most of the values above 1e_11
May 17, 2022, 18:59 by rauldmil...@gmail.com:
> On Tue, May 17, 2022 at 10:22 AM 'Viktor Grigorov' via Programming
> wrote:
>
>> 9!:19 0.1
>> 9!:19 1.8e_5
>> ({.e.}.)"1 w
>> 0 0 0 0 0
>>
>> Lowering the comparison tolera
On Tue, May 17, 2022 at 10:22 AM 'Viktor Grigorov' via Programming
wrote:
>9!:19 0.1
> 9!:19 1.8e_5
>({.e.}.)"1 w
> 0 0 0 0 0
>
> Lowering the comparison tolerance further doesn't help. What am I doing
> wrong? This can't be a 904 issue, since it happens on the 9.03.08
Then, I guess, this is a suboptimal way of solving the problem. Keeping track
of the digits in a seperate variable in a recursive tacit function seems like a
pain compared to being removing limitations on comparisons. 4--5 decimal places
is more than enough for this case.
May 17, 2022, 17:54 b
you can’t go much higher than that so if anything
I would have worked my way /down/ from there
for an analytical perspective correct the mistake in my first answer
replacing max with min and you may start upwards from ~8.23e_13
Am 17.05.22 um 16:48 schrieb 'Viktor Grigorov' via Programming:
So,
So, it's more a problem of digits being lost somewhere rather and not using a
suitable compaison tolerance? Did you have to sequentially test all
possibilities from the default upwards, or did you analytically come to 1e-11
somehow?
May 17, 2022, 17:44 by hauke.r...@uni-jena.de:
> but with
> (
Here's my solution, working with remainders only, with the recursion happening
only on members past the first (which would correspond to the first digit in
the brackets in the notation used in the problem),
({{($:`(<:@#))@.({.e.}.)y=.((1&|@%@{.),])y}}@(1&|)@:%:)
Given I'm not using extended pre
but with
(9!:19) 1e_11
I get
({.e.}.)"1 w
0 0 0 1 1
Am 17.05.22 um 16:40 schrieb Hauke Rehr:
oops, ignore that one – I see my mistake now
Am 17.05.22 um 16:37 schrieb Hauke Rehr:
I didn’t revisit pe80 (its been quite some time I last looked at pe) but
I get
<./ ({.>./@:|@:-}.)"1 w
0.539284
s
oops, ignore that one – I see my mistake now
Am 17.05.22 um 16:37 schrieb Hauke Rehr:
I didn’t revisit pe80 (its been quite some time I last looked at pe) but
I get
<./ ({.>./@:|@:-}.)"1 w
0.539284
so you would need a tolerance greater than that
if you want to get at least one 1
with a sane va
I didn’t revisit pe80 (its been quite some time I last looked at pe) but
I get
<./ ({.>./@:|@:-}.)"1 w
0.539284
so you would need a tolerance greater than that
if you want to get at least one 1
with a sane value for tolerance, a 1 is not to be expected
so what do you want to achieve, what do you
Hey,
I'm working on project euler 80, and I'm getting stack errors. Tracing the
values, step by step, everything is in order, other than the comparison. I have
the following:
]w=:{{ ((1&|@%@{.),])y }}^:(>:i.5) @(1&|)@%: 23
0.256547 0.795832 0 0 0 0
0.897916 0.256
11 matches
Mail list logo
