Talk:Long multiplication: Difference between revisions
(→BigNum) |
m (→BigNum: fix typo.) |
||
Line 21: | Line 21: | ||
complexity. |
complexity. |
||
The |
The [[ALGOL 68]] standard had a shorthand/template ≮L≯ for this. e.g. |
||
'''op''' ≮÷*, %*, ÷×, %×, '''mod'''≯ = (L '''int''' a, i) L '''int''': ... |
'''op''' ≮÷*, %*, ÷×, %×, '''mod'''≯ = (L '''int''' a, i) L '''int''': ... |
||
But this for the compiler writer, and not available to programmers. |
But this for the compiler writer, and not available to programmers. |
Revision as of 10:57, 26 February 2009
BigNum
Wouldn't it be appropriate to replace this task with arbitrary-precision arithmetic implementation? I.e. long to long +, -, *, /, and long to short +, -, *, /. The divisions are to be implemented in a complete form (result + remainder).
Hi User_talk:Dmitry-kazakov. Yes that makes sense. For the moment I'll switch this task to be a member of Category:Arbitrary precision. IIRC the Newton Raphson Kontorovich method can be used to speed up the division. It looks interesting....
Re: long/short implementations... I spotted the Ada Rational Arithmetic sample code with "long + short" and considered replicating. But by the time if counted all the combinations I ran out of fingers and toes. E.g. one would have to combine the short..., short short, short, long, long long, long... for int, real, compl for the operators "+", "-", "/", "*", "%", "%*", "**", etc ... ALSO: ×, ÷, ... abs, over, mod up, bin etc ... together with "+:=", "-:=" etc ...
Result: No more toes... I think C++/Ada templates can manage this kind of complexity.
The ALGOL 68 standard had a shorthand/template ≮L≯ for this. e.g.
op ≮÷*, %*, ÷×, %×, mod≯ = (L int a, i) L int: ...
But this for the compiler writer, and not available to programmers.
NevilleDNZ 10:56, 26 February 2009 (UTC)