Anonymous user
Talk:Factorial: Difference between revisions
m
added a TOC.
(made some cosmetic changes, added a header to the first set of comments/questions.) |
m (added a TOC.) |
||
Line 1:
__TOC__
==range limits for the factorial function==
Just a thought...it would be interesting to programmatically identify the range limits of the factorial function for the unknown implementation. (The C and c++ implementations, for example, will overflow at different places depending on the range of int.) --[[User:Short Circuit|Short Circuit]] 18:33, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
Line 31 ⟶ 34:
: Yes, it was inadvertently copied from the previous line. -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger|Gerard Schildberger]] ([[User talk:Gerard Schildberger|talk]]) 01:36, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
== The moving of 80386 to x86 Assembly ==
Line 36 ⟶ 40:
I think it is better to use generic x86, and at most to specify a "works with", if needed, rather than let proliferate 80286, 80386, 80486, ... —[[User:ShinTakezou|ShinTakezou]] 14:56, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
: I agree to a point; there's a definite progression and tendency toward backwards-compatibility. However, there are incompatible revisions. It's possible that different modes (real, protected, long and legacy) warrant some degree of recognition as their own languages--these modes represent forward and reverse compatibility constraints. --[[User:Short Circuit|Michael Mol]] 16:03, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
\
==D output==
| |||