Talk:Long multiplication: Difference between revisions

* Seed7, calls operator *

* Slate, calls operator *

 

For these examples, I would like some assurance that the outside algorithm really is long multiplication, and not some other algorithm (such as Karatsuba or Toom multiplication). Examples that use the wrong algorithm are incorrect. Further, I would like to clarify the task, to prohibit the use of outside algorithms, unless those algorithms do long multiplication. I think that [[Arbitrary-precision integers (included)]] is a better place to call outside algorithms. --[[User:Kernigh|Kernigh]] 00:36, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

::: I do not really see a point in asking for the code in languages where arbitrary precision is already builtin. For one, it should not lead newcomers of a language to do it that way. And second, as the builtin operators are usually highly tuned to the task, which a naive piece of code usually is not. Also, I found other languages, where it seemed perfectly ok to write a comment like "is native in language" (sidef) or even a call to BigInt arithmetic (D), so I think that should be also ok for languages like scheme, self, smalltalk etc. And b.t.w. what about languages which support an int256 type (eg native limited. but higher precision integer type). Are those allowed to use it or not? As I understood rosetta, it should give programmers a feel of how the language is used, not how its builtin operators are implemented. --[[User:Cg|Cg]] ([[User talk:Cg|talk]])

:::: Are you saying that newcomers to a language should not use the builtins? (Also, please sign your comments - you inserted your comment in front of my signature which might have been misleading.) --[[User:Rdm|Rdm]] ([[User talk:Rdm|talk]]) 22:19, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

 

== PLI Fails for me ==

 

==verify against builtin==