Talk:Pythagorean triples: Difference between revisions
→For reference: t
(→Also seen at: This dupe is OK because it's more inclusive) |
(→For reference: t) |
||
Line 23:
:::I'm running 10K now. Even if it finishes before I get bored I don't think I'll put up the full list. It seems like too much. I'll add the count here in any case. --[[User:Mwn3d|Mwn3d]] 00:54, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
:::It finished immediately after I clicked "submit"... I got 4858 triples and 703 primitives. --[[User:Mwn3d|Mwn3d]] 00:55, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
::Thanks, was a simple case of using < rather than <=. The Python solution should probably be corrected too.
Ok the goal of the extra, as I stated in task, is not to brute force them. 100k will seriously get on your nerves. Instead of searching all possible triples, look at the generation section in the WP article, and device a good algorithm to create them: it's a world of difference. I'll post a solution if everyone gives up, but I really want to have a task where people are required to think a lot. --[[User:Ledrug|Ledrug]] 01:16, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
:Thinking is for Project Euler! Maybe I'll try soon anyway. --[[User:Mwn3d|Mwn3d]] 01:40, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
| |||