Anonymous user
Talk:Non-continuous subsequences: Difference between revisions
→solution sizes: propose deletion
m (→solution sizes) |
(→solution sizes: propose deletion) |
||
Line 34:
:::: I believe the 34 argument case will result in a list containing (2^34)-596 elements (slightly over 17 trillion elements) with an average of about 17 arguments per element. --[[User:Rdm|Rdm]] 16:04, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
::: For me, the question was mostly of abstraction of the algorithm from obvious implementation constraint. Going ''too'' far in that direction, could result in a very difficult-to-follow code example if it weren't written correctly. --[[User:Short Circuit|Michael Mol]] 18:00, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
::I'm inclined to remove the GMP example. Its algorithm is copied from J and the first C example, while completely lost the advantage of using bit mask in the first C solution: efficiency. As it stands, it has nothing useful to offer to readers. I'm going to delete it later unless someone can give a good reason not to. --[[User:Ledrug|Ledrug]] 18:51, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
| |||