Anonymous user
Talk:Pi: Difference between revisions
m
Does it support arbitrary precision?
m (I don't know Java. Could you set the precision to a high number of digits?) |
m (Does it support arbitrary precision?) |
||
Line 41:
:::I'm not sure using the windows calculator really fits the task because (as far as I know) it doesn't actually calculate anything--it spits out a stored value. Otherwise I could say "System.out.println(Math.PI);" for Java and call it a day. That feels like cheating. --[[User:Mwn3d|Mwn3d]] 04:50, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
::::I don't know Java. Could you set the precision to a high number of digits, and then System.out.println(Math.PI)? I think a two line solution would be cool. [[User:Markhobley|Markhobley]] 11:23, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
:::::Presumably not, because it would be limited to the precision of the conventional floating point, like most other languages, or does it support arbitrary precision? [[User:Markhobley|Markhobley]] 11:27, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
:::In no way does the GUISS solution fit the spirit of the task and should be removed. In what way does it give ''successive'' digits of Pi, "until aborted by the user"? The task description is clearly asking that you use a routine that generates the digits of Pi in sequence - GUISS does not ensure that and so should be removed. The GUISS example does not aid language comparison - it stands out as an anomaly. --[[User:Paddy3118|Paddy3118]] 05:37, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
::::Hmmm, It does generate the digits o Pi in sequence. There is an abort button on the calculator, but I don't know whether it works midflow. By replacing the desktop calculator with one that uses a bigger display to get more digits and supports abortion midflow. The GUISS solution would fit the task. The limitation is with the tool provided, rather than with GUISS. [[User:Markhobley|Markhobley]] 09:11, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
| |||