Talk:Modular exponentiation: Difference between revisions
(→Tell algorithm?: new section) |
(→Tell algorithm?: i added the improve tag to my own solution) |
||
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
== Tell algorithm? == |
== Tell algorithm? == |
||
What's with needs improvement on the Java solution? A number of other solutions here just call a library function. In general, library algorithms might not always be known, or may change without notice so I'm not a big fan of telling library algorithms. As with so many other tasks, this one could go in different directions: Allowing simple library solutions, disallowing simple library solutions, or requiring a specific algorithm. The [[ |
What's with needs improvement on the Java solution? A number of other solutions here just call a library function. In general, library algorithms might not always be known, or may change without notice so I'm not a big fan of telling library algorithms. As with so many other tasks, this one could go in different directions: Allowing simple library solutions, disallowing simple library solutions, or requiring a specific algorithm. The [[wp:Modular_exponentiation#Right-to-left_binary_method|binary]] algorithm is an important one. It wouldn't be so bad to require an implementation of that specific algorithm. —[[User:Sonia|Sonia]] 18:19, 24 December 2011 (UTC) |
||
:I put the needs improvement on my own solution. I thought I would be able to figure out which alorithm it uses but I couldn't. I also thought other languages would have scratch implementations of specific algorithms so it would be nice to know which one it uses. You can take it off if you don't like it. --[[User:Mwn3d|Mwn3d]] 19:37, 24 December 2011 (UTC) |
|||
Revision as of 19:37, 24 December 2011
Draft change
About 21 hours after I posted this draft, I changed the task from "last 20" to "last 40 decimal digits". I adjusted some solutions to print 40 digits, but I did not change the Go or Java programs. --Kernigh 19:49, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
What if m < 0?
My draft currently specifies m ≠ 0. The answer when m < 0 might be ill-defined or inconsistent. Should I change from m ≠ 0 to m > 0 here? --Kernigh 23:18, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
- You could specify them all to be positive integers without causing problems; that's the only case that anyone actually wants in practice, and the others get into arguments (due to differing interpretations of how to extend the modulus operation to non-positive-valued domains). –Donal Fellows 02:00, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
Tell algorithm?
What's with needs improvement on the Java solution? A number of other solutions here just call a library function. In general, library algorithms might not always be known, or may change without notice so I'm not a big fan of telling library algorithms. As with so many other tasks, this one could go in different directions: Allowing simple library solutions, disallowing simple library solutions, or requiring a specific algorithm. The binary algorithm is an important one. It wouldn't be so bad to require an implementation of that specific algorithm. —Sonia 18:19, 24 December 2011 (UTC)
- I put the needs improvement on my own solution. I thought I would be able to figure out which alorithm it uses but I couldn't. I also thought other languages would have scratch implementations of specific algorithms so it would be nice to know which one it uses. You can take it off if you don't like it. --Mwn3d 19:37, 24 December 2011 (UTC)