Page history
7 November 2020
2 March 2020
Thundergnat
→Incorrect Example: You're right, it's wrong
+243
rosettacode>Lambertdw
no edit summary
+87
16 July 2019
rosettacode>Horst.h
→any ideas of optimizations ?: precheck if last n digits lead do multiple same digits
m+452
rosettacode>Horst.h
→any ideas of optimizations ?: speed up adding to base x <127
m+871
rosettacode>Horst.h
→Finding maximal distances to check if number needs extra digit: how to find the values with formula
m−19
20 June 2019
12 June 2019
9 June 2019
8 June 2019
7 June 2019
Enter your username
→Minimum start for Pascal version: noted that base 29 also has an issue
m+12
Enter your username
→Minimum start for Pascal version: some help with the base 17 problem
+4,009
rosettacode>Horst.h
→Minimum start for Pascal version: thanks
m+400
6 June 2019
2 June 2019
PureFox
Added comment about using congruence formula to calculate digital root.
+713
rosettacode>Horst.h
→Optimization when no extra digit required: possible improve of Digital root GO - Version
m+371
29 May 2019
PureFox
Congratulations to Nigel Galloway on his latest optimization!
+490
rosettacode>Horst.h
→Optimization when no extra digit required: clearing for myself
+778
rosettacode>Horst.h
Undo revision 283127 by Horst.h (talk)
−594
rosettacode>Horst.h
→Optimization when no extra digit required: where is the connection digital sum of start value digital sum solution?
+594
27 May 2019
Nigel Galloway
→Optimization when no extra digit required
Nigel Galloway
→Optimization when no extra digit required
+168
Nigel Galloway
Optimization when no extra digit required
+1,222
PureFox
→Trailing zero: Forgot to add that this only applies for bases > 2.
+10
PureFox
Added section about a minor optimization.
+557
26 May 2019
Thundergnat
→analytically determine minimum start value: Ah. My mishandling of square root calculations.
+550
PureFox
→analytically determine minimum start value: Added further comment.
+563
rosettacode>Horst.h
→any ideas of optimizations ?: check runtime for base 22
m+484
Thundergnat
→analytically determine minimum start value: You are right, I am wrong
+525
PureFox
Added comment about apparent discrepancy in results for base 21.
+615
25 May 2019
PureFox
Responded to comment about repeated digits from Nigel Galloway.
+520
Nigel Galloway
→analytically determine minimum start value
+507
Thundergnat
→analytically determine minimum start value: A few more small, mostly cosmetic fixes
m+7
Thundergnat
→analytically determine minimum start value: Argh. pasted in wrong version. fixed
−34
Thundergnat
→analytically determine minimum start value: doh
m+1
Thundergnat
→analytically determine minimum start value: I fail at proofreading
m+1
Thundergnat
→analytically determine minimum start value: new section
+4,805
Nigel Galloway
→Space compression and proof ?: Why 10123456789abcdefg is the smallest candidate
+265
24 May 2019
Nigel Galloway
→Space compression and proof ?
+38
Hout
→Space compression and proof ?
+183
Hout
→Space compression and proof ?: Cases where q=0 ?
+490
Nigel Galloway
→Space compression and proof ?
mNigel Galloway
→Space compression and proof ?
mNigel Galloway
→Space compression and proof ?
+608
Hout
→Space compression and proof ?
m+8
Hout
→Space compression and proof ?
+701
23 May 2019
Thundergnat
→Space compression and proof ?: tentative smallest for base 17
+364
Hout
→Space compression and proof ?
+149
Nigel Galloway
→Space compression and proof ?
+847
Hout
→Space compression and proof ?
+1,057