On 21-06-11 22:10, Irmen de Jong wrote:
[stuff]
I didn't read the last paragraph of John's message until just now, and
now realize that what I wrote is likely way too much information for
what he asked.
I'm sorry. Next time I'll read everything until and including the last
full stop.
Irmen
-
On Jun 21, 3:22 pm, Irmen de Jong wrote:
> On 21-06-11 22:10, Irmen de Jong wrote:
> [stuff]
>
> I didn't read the last paragraph of John's message until just now, and
> now realize that what I wrote is likely way too much information for
> what he asked.
> I'm sorry. Next time I'll read everythin
On 21-6-2011 23:09, John Salerno wrote:
> On Jun 21, 3:22 pm, Irmen de Jong wrote:
>> On 21-06-11 22:10, Irmen de Jong wrote:
>> [stuff]
>>
>> I didn't read the last paragraph of John's message until just now, and
>> now realize that what I wrote is likely way too much information for
>> what he a
On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 3:09 PM, John Salerno wrote:
> Don't worry, I was still unclear about what to do after reading all
> the responses, even yours! But one thing that made me feel better was
> that I wasn't having a Python problem as much as a *math* problem. I
> changed my get_factors functio
On Jun 21, 4:41 pm, Ian Kelly wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 3:09 PM, John Salerno wrote:
> > Don't worry, I was still unclear about what to do after reading all
> > the responses, even yours! But one thing that made me feel better was
> > that I wasn't having a Python problem as much as a *mat
2011/6/21 John Salerno :
> However, even after reading the Wikipedia page about prime numbers and
> trial division, I'm still a little unclear as to why the square root
> of the number is the upper bound of the range you need to check.
> --
There are likely be some more elaborated proofs, but it s
John Salerno writes:
> However, even after reading the Wikipedia page about prime numbers and
> trial division, I'm still a little unclear as to why the square root
> of the number is the upper bound of the range you need to check.
Suppose p is the smallest divisor of n, and p > sqrt(n).
("Diviso
::sigh:: Well, I'm stuck again and it has to do with my get_factors
function again, I think. Even with the slight optimization, it's
taking forever on 20! (factorial, not excitement) :) It's frustrating
because I have the Python right, but I'm getting stuck on the math.
The problem:
"What is the
John Salerno writes:
> It's frustrating because I have the Python right, but I'm getting
> stuck on the math
> "What is the smallest positive number that is evenly divisible by all
> of the numbers from 1 to 20?"
The answer is lcm [1,2,3, ... 20]. You can figure out how to implement
lcm.
Th
On 22/06/2011 02:21, John Salerno wrote:
::sigh:: Well, I'm stuck again and it has to do with my get_factors
function again, I think. Even with the slight optimization, it's
taking forever on 20! (factorial, not excitement) :) It's frustrating
because I have the Python right, but I'm getting stu
John Salerno wrote:
> ::sigh:: Well, I'm stuck again and it has to do with my get_factors
> function again, I think. Even with the slight optimization, it's
> taking forever on 20! (factorial, not excitement) :) It's frustrating
> because I have the Python right, but I'm getting stuck on the math
On Jun 21, 9:09 pm, Paul Rubin wrote:
> John Salerno writes:
> > It's frustrating because I have the Python right, but I'm getting
> > stuck on the math
> > "What is the smallest positive number that is evenly divisible by all
> > of the numbers from 1 to 20?"
>
> The answer is lcm [1,2,3, ..
On Jun 21, 10:02 pm, Mel wrote:
> John Salerno wrote:
> > ::sigh:: Well, I'm stuck again and it has to do with my get_factors
> > function again, I think. Even with the slight optimization, it's
> > taking forever on 20! (factorial, not excitement) :) It's frustrating
> > because I have the Pytho
On 22-6-2011 5:02, John Salerno wrote:
> Thanks. So far they are helping me with Python too, but definitely not
> as much as more general exercises would, I'm sure. The part about
> writing the code is fun, but once that's done, I seem to end up stuck
> with an inefficient implementation because I
On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 7:48 AM, John Salerno wrote:
> Thanks for the all the advice everyone. Now I'm on to problem #4, and
> I'm stumped again, but that's what's fun! :)
So now that you've solved it, I'd like to see some fast one-liners to
do the job. (Since Python cares about whitespace, it mi
Oops, realized after posting that there's a bug in my code - it
returns 1 for a perfect square. Need another check in the 'while'
loop, thus:
On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 8:59 AM, Chris Angelico wrote:
> exec 600851475143; for (int i=2;ii) ret/=i
>
> while not ret%i and ret>i:
Definitely room for im
16 matches
Mail list logo
