Talk:Horner's rule for polynomial evaluation: Difference between revisions
Content added Content deleted
(→Task format?: Ta!) |
|||
| (2 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
: I had a go at tidying things up. The trick is to use indentation and avoid <nowiki><br></nowiki>. I also made the pseudocode look more pseudocode-y; it might be better to rewrite it to use a '''for…downto''' loop though. –[[User:Dkf|Donal Fellows]] 09:13, 31 March 2010 (UTC) |
: I had a go at tidying things up. The trick is to use indentation and avoid <nowiki><br></nowiki>. I also made the pseudocode look more pseudocode-y; it might be better to rewrite it to use a '''for…downto''' loop though. –[[User:Dkf|Donal Fellows]] 09:13, 31 March 2010 (UTC) |
||
:: Thanks Donal. --[[User:Paddy3118|Paddy3118]] 14:29, 31 March 2010 (UTC) |
:: Thanks Donal. --[[User:Paddy3118|Paddy3118]] 14:29, 31 March 2010 (UTC) |
||
==J language and p.== |
|||
Just wondered, does p. use Horner's rule? --[[User:Paddy3118|Paddy3118]] 03:11, 1 April 2010 (UTC) |
|||
: Actually, #. (which represents the core of Horner's approach and is incredibly useful) existed in the language spec long before p. and p. was added for convenience and to support a few other related polynomial mechanisms. (So, it is almost certain that p. uses Horner's rule.) --[[User:Rdm|Rdm]] 15:06, 12 August 2010 (UTC) |
|||
== C++ solution: Error == |
|||
I think there's a bug in the C++ solution (the original one, not the more idiomatic one I just added): It seems that it decrements an iterator to the first element of the vector, which is undefined behaviour (and may trigger a run time error on certain implementations). --[[User:Ce|Ce]] 12:42, 12 August 2010 (UTC) |
|||
Latest revision as of 15:06, 12 August 2010
Task format?
I don't particularly like the layout of the equations in the task description just yet. Although i have tried to cut down on the amount of equations, I needed some, but they don't seem to flow with the text around them very well. --Paddy3118 06:28, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
- I had a go at tidying things up. The trick is to use indentation and avoid <br>. I also made the pseudocode look more pseudocode-y; it might be better to rewrite it to use a for…downto loop though. –Donal Fellows 09:13, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks Donal. --Paddy3118 14:29, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
J language and p.
Just wondered, does p. use Horner's rule? --Paddy3118 03:11, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
- Actually, #. (which represents the core of Horner's approach and is incredibly useful) existed in the language spec long before p. and p. was added for convenience and to support a few other related polynomial mechanisms. (So, it is almost certain that p. uses Horner's rule.) --Rdm 15:06, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
C++ solution: Error
I think there's a bug in the C++ solution (the original one, not the more idiomatic one I just added): It seems that it decrements an iterator to the first element of the vector, which is undefined behaviour (and may trigger a run time error on certain implementations). --Ce 12:42, 12 August 2010 (UTC)