Oh, wait, 1000000 has one more zero than 100000, so
that won't work.

How about: first process the i. 1000000 by dividing every
power of 5 by 10 (so you have 1 2 3 4 0.5 6 7 8 9 1 11 ...); then
(optionally) limit those values to 5 digits; then do
100000&|@*/

Make sure you turn 25 into 0.25, 125 into 0.125, etc

Henry Rich


> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Henry Rich
> Sent: Thursday, March 27, 2008 1:31 PM
> To: 'Programming forum'
> Subject: RE: [Jprogramming] Trying to handle large factorials 
> -- odd error
> 
> Only the low 5 digits of each input number contribute, so once you
> get up to 100000 you can use those results to calculate higher
> values quickly.
> 
> Henry Rich
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Geoff Canyon
> > Sent: Thursday, March 27, 2008 11:18 AM
> > To: Programming forum
> > Subject: Re: [Jprogramming] Trying to handle large factorials 
> > -- odd error
> > 
> > Thanks for the tip! I solved my problem by switching to
> > 
> >     f =: (((|.&.":)@(5{.":&(".@(,&'x')@|.&":)))@*)/
> > 
> > I should have been more clear. I'm talking _very_ large 
> factorials:  
> > 100,000 up to perhaps a million. For numbers like those, 
> > simply doing ! 
> > 100000x and then extracting the last five non-zero digits 
> is at best  
> > inefficient and likely a go-make-a-cup-of-coffee proposition.
> > 
> > At each step, only the last five non-zero digits need to be 
> kept, so  
> > for example, rather than multiplying 10001 by !10000x (a 
> 35660-digit  
> > number) and then getting the digits I want, I just multiply 
> 10001 by  
> > 79008 (the last five non-zero digits of !10000x) to get the 
> > last five  
> > non-zero digits of !10001. At least, that's the plan.
> > 
> > And it seems to work:
> > 
> >     f =: (((|.&.":)@(5{.":&(|.&.":)))@*)/
> >     Ts 'f >:i.5000x'
> > 0.0493279 782208
> >     Ts 'f >:i.6000x'
> > 0.059438 918400
> >     Ts 'f >:i.7000x'
> > 0.0696259 1.05459e6
> > 
> > So I don't like the storage requirements, but the time 
> taken appears  
> > to be scaling roughly linearly, which it doesn't come near 
> to doing  
> > with actual factorials. Looking at it more concretely, consider my  
> > code vs. ! for 10000x:
> > 
> >     Ts 'f >:i.10000x'
> > 0.0983548 1.56147e6
> >     Ts '!10000x'
> > 1.08737 1.01062e6
> > 
> > My code is 100 times faster, although it takes more space. 
> I figure  
> > that the way to solve both the space issue might be to switch to a  
> > recursive function.
> > 
> > regards,
> > 
> > Geoff
> > 
> > 
> > On Mar 26, 2008, at 10:40 PM, bill lam wrote:
> > > You need to add the trailing 'x' to the formatted number.
> > > I'm unskillful in writing tacit form but the following seems  
> > > implementing your logic.
> > >      _5{. |. ": ". ,&'x' |. ": */ 1+i.10x
> > > 36288
> > >      _5{. |. ": ". ,&'x' |. ": */ 1+i.20x
> > > 17664
> > >   _5{. |. ": ". ,&'x' |. ": */ 1+i.10050x
> > > 69696
> > >
> > > btw I think that ! should be more efficient than */@:>:@:i.
> > >
> > > Geoff Canyon wrote:
> > >> I'm trying to find the last five non-zero digits of a large  
> > >> factorial. So for:
> > >> !10x = 3628800
> > >> the answer would be 36288 while for:
> > >> !20x = 2432902008176640000
> > >> the answer would be 17664.
> > >> I'm trying to do this by calculating /* 1+i.1000 without  
> > >> calculating large numbers by losing the trailing zeroes at each  
> > >> step and the leading digits more than five. Here's what 
> I have so  
> > >> far:
> > >> (((|.&.":)@(5{.":&(|.&.":)))@*)/ 1+i.20x
> > >> The truncating code:
> > >> -- Converts to string, transposes, and converts back to 
> a number.  
> > >> That loses trailing zeroes (because they're now leading zeroes).
> > >> -- Converts to string and grabs the first five 
> characters (which  
> > >> were the last five non-zero digits).
> > >> -- Converts to string again -- not sure why this is 
> > necessary, but  
> > >> it doesn't work otherwise -- transposes, and converts back to a  
> > >> number.
> > >> This whole thing is performed atop *, and the resulting verb is  
> > >> inserted into the list from 1 to a large number.
> > >> This seems to work for large numbers up to 10049x. At 
> > 10050x I get  
> > >> an ill-formed number error.
> > >> Where did I go wrong?
> > >> regards,
> > >> Geoff
> > >> 
> > 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >> For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/ 
> > >> forums.htm
> > >
> > > 
> > 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > For information about J forums see 
> > http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
> > >
> > 
> > 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > For information about J forums see 
> > http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> For information about J forums see 
> http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm

Reply via email to