Anonymous user
Talk:Zeckendorf number representation: Difference between revisions
Talk:Zeckendorf number representation (view source)
Revision as of 23:47, 11 October 2012
, 11 years ago→Consensus on the sequence: no duplicate 1s, no required method
(→Consensus on the sequence: Slippery!) |
(→Consensus on the sequence: no duplicate 1s, no required method) |
||
Line 12:
This is me asking for help. Help!<br>
Anyone care to suggest a rework of the task that would be better. Or would a re-wording allowing different starting conditions so long as they were stated suffice? Technically the task is still draft but it would be good if any change meant minor or no change to the existing solutions of others. P.S. Thanks Sonia, Ledrug, TimToady for the comments so far. --[[User:Paddy3118|Paddy3118]] 20:02, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
: The sequence should be specified as 1,2,3,5,8..., and a Zeckendorf representation of a non-negative integer n is n expressed as the sum of non-consecutive terms in that sequence. This is sufficient and unambiguous: every n >= 0 has a unique such representation, and vice versa. I don't think the task should specify ''how'' one derives such a summation from n; listing a method as a hint, fine, putting it in the spec as if it's required, no. --[[User:Ledrug|Ledrug]] 23:47, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
==Perl 6, wrong fib sequence==
| |||