Will Ness <will_n48 <at> yahoo.com> writes: > > > That might be why Daniel's structure is better: it plunges down faster than > mine. > > "treefold" structure was: > (2+4) + ( (4+8) + ( (8+16) + ( (16+32) + ( (32+64) + ....... )))) > dpths: 3 4 4 5 5 6 6 7 7 8
this should of course have been dpths: 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 > > daniel's: > (2+(4+6)) + ( (8+(10+12)) + ( (14+(16+18)) + ( (20+(22+24)) + .... )) > 3 5 5.4 6 7.8 7.9 8 9 9.5 9.6 10.7 10.8 > hmm. :| _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
