Talk:Sum and product puzzle: Difference between revisions
Content added Content deleted
(→Scala: (relevance or otherwise to REXX of solutions built around higher order functions)) |
Walterpachl (talk | contribs) (→A question on GO: new section) |
||
Line 19: | Line 19: | ||
:: Still not explicit enough :-( Sorry Meanwhile I added 2 translations where I could understand the source (AWK and GO/ --[[User:Walterpachl|Walterpachl]] ([[User talk:Walterpachl|talk]]) 18:54, 26 October 2016 (UTC) |
:: Still not explicit enough :-( Sorry Meanwhile I added 2 translations where I could understand the source (AWK and GO/ --[[User:Walterpachl|Walterpachl]] ([[User talk:Walterpachl|talk]]) 18:54, 26 October 2016 (UTC) |
||
::: Do higher order functions feature in the architecture or traditions of REXX ? If not, the patterns of functional composition used in the Haskell and Scala etc examples may be a little hard to translate all that directly. [[User:Hout|Hout]] ([[User talk:Hout|talk]]) 19:18, 3 November 2016 (UTC) |
::: Do higher order functions feature in the architecture or traditions of REXX ? If not, the patterns of functional composition used in the Haskell and Scala etc examples may be a little hard to translate all that directly. [[User:Hout|Hout]] ([[User talk:Hout|talk]]) 19:18, 3 November 2016 (UTC) |
||
== A question on GO == |
|||
I translated GO to Rexx and the fonal piece missing for understanding is this: |
|||
Why does this justify the removal of the pair p?? |
|||
Shouldn't the pair a/b be discarded??? |
|||
<pre> |
|||
for a := 2; a < s/2+s&1; a++ { |
|||
b := s - a |
|||
if products[a*b] == 1 { |
|||
// Excluded because P would have a unique product |
|||
continue pairs</pre> |
|||
~~---- |
Revision as of 18:54, 5 November 2016
Remove draft status?
Now that I improved the task description, is this task ready for prime time? --Smls (talk) 14:47, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
Scala
Could someone in the know please explain these two lines in plain English?
val step2 = step0 filter { sumEq(_) forall { prodEq(_).size != 1 }}
step2 contains the pairs whose product is unique and ??
val step3 = step2 filter { prodEq(_).intersect(step2).size == 1 }
- step2 filters the step0 integer pairs for pairs where "For every possible sum decomposition of the number X+Y, the product has in turn more than one product decomposition"
- step3 filters the set defined by step2 for pairs where "The number X*Y has only one product decomposition for which fact 1 is true"
- Perhaps the Haskell or JavaScript versions might seem more legible ? Hout (talk) 17:35, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
- Still not explicit enough :-( Sorry Meanwhile I added 2 translations where I could understand the source (AWK and GO/ --Walterpachl (talk) 18:54, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
A question on GO
I translated GO to Rexx and the fonal piece missing for understanding is this:
Why does this justify the removal of the pair p??
Shouldn't the pair a/b be discarded???
for a := 2; a < s/2+s&1; a++ { b := s - a if products[a*b] == 1 { // Excluded because P would have a unique product continue pairs
~~----