Computer Science Canada Larger Integers |
Author: | drij [ Sun Oct 12, 2008 2:18 pm ] | ||
Post subject: | Larger Integers | ||
I was working my way through the problems on Project Euler when I encountered an issue with problem 3. The problem is: "What is the largest prime factor of 600851475143?" I wrote a nice little prime-checking function:
After I wrote this, I couldn't figure out how to deal with the size of the number 600851475143. My question is, is it possible to work with large numbers such as this in turing? |
Author: | OneOffDriveByPoster [ Sun Oct 12, 2008 4:52 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Larger Integers |
Yes, the double-precision floating point can represent at least this, and all the integers >= 0 below it exactly. |
Author: | Saad [ Sun Oct 12, 2008 4:58 pm ] |
Post subject: | RE:Larger Integers |
But it should be known that it can not represent accurately be represented. Unfortunately Turing has no default way of handling them with full accuray. You could make your own though. |
Author: | Insectoid [ Sun Oct 12, 2008 9:02 pm ] |
Post subject: | RE:Larger Integers |
does Turing not support 'long' variables? |
Author: | Saad [ Sun Oct 12, 2008 9:46 pm ] |
Post subject: | RE:Larger Integers |
None to my knowledge |
Author: | [Gandalf] [ Sun Oct 12, 2008 9:48 pm ] |
Post subject: | RE:Larger Integers |
Nope, it doesn't. float is as much precision as you can get. |
Author: | drij [ Mon Oct 13, 2008 10:27 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Larger Integers |
Ok then. Thanks for all your replies. |
Author: | [Gandalf] [ Mon Oct 13, 2008 7:20 pm ] |
Post subject: | RE:Larger Integers |
If you're looking to get further ahead in Euler, and are willing to learn a new language that's not too difficult, I'd recommend Ruby or Python. Both, AFAIK, support arbitrarily long integers by default. |