Talk:Hamming numbers: Difference between revisions
Content added Content deleted
(→Captha unusable: new section) |
|||
| Line 160: | Line 160: | ||
: The '#1' variant is indeed doing something completely different. Original code's <code>tee()</code> creates multiple copies of a generator, but does this exactly once per <code>raymonds_hamming()</code> call. The '#1' variant is actually recursive: caller calls <code>hamming_number()</code>, which in turn calls <code>tee()</code> and creates copies ... which unfortunately calls <code>hamming_number()</code> again with a new closure, which calles <code>tee()</code> and makes new sets of copies, recursively. Either the author on programmingpraxis site misunderstood how <code>tee()</code> works, or he simply wanted brevity (much) more than efficiency. --[[User:Ledrug|Ledrug]] 03:19, 13 October 2012 (UTC) |
: The '#1' variant is indeed doing something completely different. Original code's <code>tee()</code> creates multiple copies of a generator, but does this exactly once per <code>raymonds_hamming()</code> call. The '#1' variant is actually recursive: caller calls <code>hamming_number()</code>, which in turn calls <code>tee()</code> and creates copies ... which unfortunately calls <code>hamming_number()</code> again with a new closure, which calles <code>tee()</code> and makes new sets of copies, recursively. Either the author on programmingpraxis site misunderstood how <code>tee()</code> works, or he simply wanted brevity (much) more than efficiency. --[[User:Ledrug|Ledrug]] 03:19, 13 October 2012 (UTC) |
||
== Captha unusable == |
|||
I've been spending over ten attempts to correct an error at the Fortran module, but neither listening nor reading helped a bit. |
|||
So I can't add this link again at Fortran, sorry: //fortran.com/big_integer_module.f95 |
|||
This way the whole darn thing is pretty much counterproductive. |
|||