What type of numbers are we talking about? Is there any type of
commonality between these numbers? For instance if you are representing
a binary progression, the number "9" could have and equivelent decimal
system value of 512. Another way to think about this technique is
degrees used to measure an angle. Accounting for the numbers range could
also be benificial in a shorter representation. Also what degree of
accuracy is desired?
Using a high number base could make a considerable difference. REBOL
supports base 64, and if you brew your own you probably could achieve
around base 94 by using common ascii characters.
If your trying to save disk or memory space, using raw binary
representation (ie "A" = 65 "AA" = 16705) is sensible. Of course many
number representations would yeild characters that are not necessarily
visible.
And of course there is always compression.
--Ryan
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Ok obviously REBOL has limitation with very big numbers. However,
> with the kind of calculations I want to make alot of software will
> have limitations. I'm looking to pick some brains for an alternative
> to scientific notation. I like scientific notation as it represents
> large numbers in a compact manner however; in my case, I have large
> numbers and want to represent a very large number in the smallest
> footprint possible. Scientific Notation doesnt acheive that with the
> type of numbers I will be calculating. Any mathmatics gurus have any
> ideas? References to where I can find out about the notations would
> be helpful also.
>
> Paul Tretter
>
> --
> Pop3Now Personal, Manage 5 Email Accounts From 1 Secure Window
> Sign Up Today! Visit http://www.pop3now.com/personal
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list, please send an email to
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe" in the
> subject, without the quotes.
--
To unsubscribe from this list, please send an email to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe" in the
subject, without the quotes.
