Talk:Evaluate binomial coefficients

Task Needs Refinement

The task needs more work. I've made the math look nicer, but it would help if we had some particular values to try to calculate too; I've done binom(60,30), but that requires a non-trivial component somewhere — even the result won't fit in 32-bit ints, let alone any intermediate values — so I don't know if it is really suitable as an actual task. –Donal Fellows 00:39, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

I've refined this task a bit, and made it binom(5,3), okay? --Alegend 01:03, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

That's great. Thanks! –Donal Fellows 12:52, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

Welcome! :D --Alegend 21:00, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

In my times binomial coefficients were calculated using asymptotic series, which is of course a way different task. --Dmitry-kazakov 09:53, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

Type Double inadeqate

The binomial coefficients are of type Integer. If you use type Double instead (as in Java translated from Python), for instance binomCoeff(49, 6) gives 1.3983816000000002E7

Task Title

Starting a task with the word "Evaluate" is unhelpful - all tasks involve evaluating. I suggest renaming this "Binomial coefficient".

Edits on April 17 2016 left formulae invisible on OS X Chrome & Safari

One problem will be the introduction of redundant white space flanking the Latex expressions inside Math tags. There may be others, but visibility should be restored by reverting the contents of Math tags to their pre-April 17 state.

Please desist from deleting Functional Python examples

Paddy or Donald, please curb your appetite for deletionary vandalism, if you can. The example which you deleted as 'obfuscation' was deliberately clearer than the incumbent, explicitly labelling the implicit products and factorials. It was also, unlike, the incumbent functional version, compatible with Python 3, which requires an import of reduce. There is no need for a resurgence of this destructive and gratuitous campaign, and I have restored the code. You did something similar recently to an example deriving cartesian products from the applicative abstraction. Hout (talk) 10:57, 21 February 2019 (UTC)