Yes, but 2^60 > 10^18, so it is enough.

On Tue, Sep 15, 2009 at 5:36 AM, Hawston LLH <[email protected]> wrote:

> long long is 8 byte = 64 bits only.
>
>
> On Mon, Sep 14, 2009 at 9:40 PM, Ken Corbin <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>
>> 64 bit longs  start to overflow about 10**18.  Java has a BigInteger
>> infinite
>> precision integer class that I've use in a couple of these problems when
>> computations start approaching that size.  The C++ code I've looked at
>> used
>> long long variables which I think are 128 bits.  They are still going to
>> overflow eventually, but apparently they are big enough to solve all code
>> jam
>> problems.
>>
>> For some problems, like Next Number in this round, you can just treat the
>> number as a string an manipulate an array of digits.  There is no need to
>> turn it into a binary representation.
>>
>> Best regards,
>> -Ken
>>
>> On Sunday 13 September 2009 22:17:10 Carlos Guia wrote:
>> > Most likely overflow, 32bit integers will overflow in the large set.
>> > Carlos Guía
>> >
>> > On Sun, Sep 13, 2009 at 11:56 PM, Seedrick <[email protected]
>> >wrote:
>> > > hi!!
>> > >
>> > > i used the exaclty same logic....
>> > > and got the small input correct but the large one wrong...
>> > >
>> > > What could be the problem with this logic? I have tried all sorts of
>> > > possible cases but could not figure this out.
>> > >
>> > > On Sep 13, 4:50 pm, Ketan Joshi <[email protected]> wrote:
>> > > > Hi,
>> > > > I used the below logic to solve this:
>> > > >
>> > > > 1) find number of unique chars in the input number. This becomes the
>> > > > base
>> > >
>> > > in
>> > >
>> > > > which it will have lowest value.
>> > > > 2) assign '1' to first char
>> > > > 3) assign '0' to second unique char that appears in the input num
>> > > > 4) assign 2..base-1 to each unique char that appears in the input in
>> > > > the increasing order
>> > > > -- So cats becomes 1023 and zig becomes 102
>> > > > 5) result = 0;
>> > > > for (i=0;i++;i<length of num){
>> > > >   result = result * base + number representing char[i]}
>> > > >
>> > > > output result.
>> > > >
>> > > > This logic worked fine for small input. But I got "incorrect"
>> response
>> > >
>> > > for
>> > >
>> > > > large input.
>> > > > Can someone tell me if this logic is flawed in any sense?
>> > > >
>> > > > Regards,
>> > > > KeJo
>> > > >
>> > > > --
>> > > > Blog:http://beingkejo.wordpress.com
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> >
>


-- 
Best regards, Дектярев Михаил

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"google-codejam" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/google-code?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to