Anonymous user
User talk:CRGreathouse: Difference between revisions
Nth PARI/GP Output: Thanks
(Nth PARI/GP Output: Thanks) |
|||
| (19 intermediate revisions by 7 users not shown) | |||
Line 3:
The problem I saw with your code was that all the output printed were not of the maximal value. It printed the best values so far as it converged to the maximal. I would expect, (and you could check by looking at a few of the other examples outputs), that the only printout should be of one or more (probably one ''or'' all four), of the maximal values. It would be good to carry on the conversation on the relevant talk page [[Talk:Knapsack problem/Unbounded#The problem with the PARI/GP solution|here]]. --[[User:Paddy3118|Paddy3118]] 05:25, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
: Frankly -- and don't take this poorly -- but it did offend me.
: The code functioned as intended and as documented. That way is sensible -- if you scale these instances up they could run for hours or days, and getting feedback in that time is useful.
: Further, the "fix" is obvious -- don't output, save the appropriate line(s), then output at the end. But this wouldn't add anything to the program, adds clutter, and removes the nice scaling property I mentioned.
: If you want to keep it, feel free to "fix" it. I won't, because I think the fixed version is worse.
: [[User:CRGreathouse|CRGreathouse]] 05:29, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
::Hi again, I'll take your points and give replies:
::* I explained that no offence was meant. Sorry if it spoilt your RC experience.
::* My points were about getting the code to better fit the task description, and fit in better with the other examples. In this case scale is something that is good enough to do the task given. We do welcome talk of scalability and allow multiple solutions that address any other issues that contributors might want to bring up, but the program was on its own and so I thought it should accomplish the task as output from other examples does. When there are examples in other languages, with output, then it is good to either follow their examples or be aware of and probably explain answers that may be different.
::* The fix may well be obvious but in this case I thought that it should be given. You have shown that you know how to do it, but without the fix being in place I think that you cannot make a fair comparison with other language examples that use brute force but go that bit extra to only print the right answer, rather than a lot of wrong answers followed by the right answer. Other examples use different ''algorithms'' to add scalability.
::* I'm afraid I don't write PARI/GP so will not personally be applying a fix (I converted the code to Python and executed the Python to confirm my initial opinion).
::I guess we still disagree, but that's life. Thanks for your contributions to RC I do welcome them, as I do value the site and all who contribute. --[[User:Paddy3118|Paddy3118]] 06:08, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
::: It's OK, the problem is fixed as far as I'm concerned. [[User:CRGreathouse|CRGreathouse]] 06:10, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
::: That is, the code that bothers you is gone and the template that bothers me is gone. That there is no Pari code for that problem is of no particular consequence. [[User:CRGreathouse|CRGreathouse]] 06:11, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
==Welcome!==
(I started the practice of leaving greeting notes in early 2010, so I missed leaving one when you signed up. Anyway, I hope this helps.)
{{User:Short Circuit/new user greeting}}--[[User:Short Circuit|Michael Mol]] 12:31, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
==Hailstone output==
Hi, I saw your comment ''"output isn't needed -- if you want that, run the program. But to satisfy the pedant here's the Windows output."'' and read again the task details as well as the context of the other examples showing output. The idea is to fulfil the task and you would be one of the few who took the opinion that reminding one of the need to show output in this case is pedantic. Maybe careful, but not [http://oxforddictionaries.com/view/entry/m_en_gb0614170#m_en_gb0614170 pedantic].
Most readers will not be able to run all examples, and the request to show output in some RC tasks has allowed us collectively to both spot errors in calculations, and also spot weaknesses in task descriptions. It can also show up differences in efforts to make the output pleasing to the eye (but not so much in the Hailstone task). --[[User:Paddy3118|Paddy3118]] 22:33, 6 May 2011 (UTC)
: <s>It's pretty unusual that most of the entries for that task wrote their output; almost none of the answers across the site do this. I don't really see the point in having it, and standardizing Rosetta Code would suggest deleting the outputs from the other programs for that task. But hey, you have your pound of flesh, I did it the way you wanted rather than the way I want it or the way the rest of the site does it. [[User:CRGreathouse|CRGreathouse]] 23:43, 6 May 2011 (UTC)</s>
: Sorry, that's pretty harsh. I'm actually recovering from a pretty bad bug right now and I'm not in the best of tempers. [[User:CRGreathouse|CRGreathouse]] 04:06, 7 May 2011 (UTC)
::I've had some bad flu's in my time ... So much so that I reckoned that I alternate between having a really bad flu one year then only a milder flu the next. Last year was my good year so I am looking at a real stinker this winter - and they usually occur in time to mess with my xmas/new year holidays too! Get well soon :-)
:: --[[User:Paddy3118|Paddy3118]] 07:25, 7 May 2011 (UTC)
== Header change ==
I saw a change you made to the header template recently. Why did we need that change exactly? Were there any places where you saw C# causing a problem? Also, before making edits to widely used templates (like {{tmpl|task}}, {{tmpl|language}}, and {{tmpl|header}}) it would probably be nice to have a discussion on the problem you're fixing. --[[User:Mwn3d|Mwn3d]] 18:47, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
: After seeing many headers proclaiming "C sharp" I decided to correct the problem and have them display as C#. I don't know if there are other languages with similar issues (none that I saw at a quick glance), but they should probably be included as well.
: The problem was already documented on the template itself, with a workaround supplied. This obviates that need except for new languages.
: [[User:CRGreathouse|CRGreathouse]] 19:58, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
::F# is treated the same way. I don't think there are any others. --[[User:Mwn3d|Mwn3d]] 20:38, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
::: Great, added that one.
::: On an unrelated note: I saw [[:Category:JAMES II/Rule-based Cellular Automata]] and was wondering what you thought. At a glance it seems like it should not be a programming language (rather, that should be [[:Category:JAMES II]] and this should be a subcategory or an implementation page) but perhaps I'm missing something?
::: [[User:CRGreathouse|CRGreathouse]] 21:02, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
== Your language file ==
Hi,
I just uploaded the language file version as uploaded on the SourceForge trcker. Please take care of the notes there.
Regards,
--[[User:BenBE|BenBE]] 13:20, 5 July 2011 (UTC).
P.S.: http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&aid=3303485&group_id=114997&atid=670234
P.P.S.: Have a look at what the langcheck.php (included with GeSHi) tells you about the formatting. I just skimmed over the file and it screamed like the langcheck would complain ;-)
=== LangCheck Report ===
Validating language file for 'parigp' ... Failed
:NOTICE Language file contains unescaped tabulator chars (probably for indentation)!
:NOTICE Language file contains irregular indentation (other than 4 spaces per indentation level)!
:WARNING Language file contains per-group duplicate keyword 'realprecision' in $language_data['KEYWORDS'][2]!
:ERROR Language file contains no $language_data['CASE_SENSITIVE'] specification for keyword group 3!
:ERROR Language file contains no $language_data['URLS'] specification for keyword group 3!
:WARNING Language file contains cross-group duplicate keyword 'simplify' in $language_data['KEYWORDS'][1] and $language_data['KEYWORDS'][2]!
:WARNING Language file contains cross-group duplicate keyword 'log' in $language_data['KEYWORDS'][1] and $language_data['KEYWORDS'][2]!
:WARNING Language file contains cross-group duplicate keyword 'real' in $language_data['KEYWORDS'][1] and $language_data['KEYWORDS'][3]!
==[[Talk:Matrix arithmetic]]==
Hi, I left a question on the task. Thanks. --[[User:Paddy3118|Paddy3118]] 14:06, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
== Revert of an "incorrect" for PARI/GP Solution to Floyd's Triangle. ==
Hi, I received your message that your reverted the "incorrect" tag I added to the solution, thanks.
Please take a more careful look at the problem, and at the sample output of numerous solutions that get it right.
The last two rows of the example output for the n=14 case show it clearly:
<pre> 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91
92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105</pre>
The columns in the solution are all equal width. So in the last row, there are two spaces between the two-digit columns like 93 and 94.
The problem calls for the columns to be packed, rather than of equal width: it states that there is to be one space between the columns in the last row, so the last two rows look like this:
<pre> 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91
92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105</pre>
[[User:Kazinator|Kazinator]] ([[User talk:Kazinator|talk]]) 17:49, 21 March 2014 (UTC)
==[[N%27th#PARI.2FGP|Nth PARI/GP Output]]==
If the solution works, can you update all of the output? The %3 line still shows
<pre>"1011st", "1012nd", "1013rd"</pre>
while the %4 shows
<pre>"1012th"</pre>
--[[User:Ooorah|Ooorah]] ([[User talk:Ooorah|talk]]) 15:33, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
:Thanks for fixing that! --[[User:Ooorah|Ooorah]] ([[User talk:Ooorah|talk]]) 13:07, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
| |||