[Issue 5765] ^^ and << with BigInts

https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=5765 RazvanN changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED

Re: [Issue 5765] ^^ and with BigInts

Hi Whats the status on a BigInt implementation of modular exponentiation?

[Issue 5765] ^^ and with BigInts

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5765 --- Comment #9 from bearophile_h...@eml.cc 2011-05-09 15:23:08 PDT --- See a working version, and the workarounds used: http://rosettacode.org/wiki/Ackermann_function#D -- Configure issuemail:

[Issue 5765] ^^ and with BigInts

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5765 --- Comment #3 from Don clugd...@yahoo.com.au 2011-03-23 03:42:32 PDT --- OK, although I don't think that the case with Ackermann code is so bad. It's basically giving you a compile-time warning that the function blows up very, very easily.

[Issue 5765] ^^ and with BigInts

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5765 --- Comment #4 from bearophile_h...@eml.cc 2011-03-23 05:55:03 PDT --- (In reply to comment #3) The thing I'm really worried about is this: BigInt a, b, c; a = (a ^^ b) % c; This is an attempt to do modular exponentiation, which comes up

[Issue 5765] ^^ and with BigInts

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5765 --- Comment #5 from Don clugd...@yahoo.com.au 2011-03-23 06:57:19 PDT --- (In reply to comment #4) (In reply to comment #3) The thing I'm really worried about is this: BigInt a, b, c; a = (a ^^ b) % c; This is an attempt to do

[Issue 5765] ^^ and with BigInts

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5765 --- Comment #6 from bearophile_h...@eml.cc 2011-03-23 10:55:03 PDT --- (In reply to comment #5) That's a false consistency. T ^^ int is the common operation, not T ^^ T. Really. BigInt ^^ BigInt isn't a BigInt. It's too big to be

[Issue 5765] ^^ and with BigInts

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5765 --- Comment #7 from Don clugd...@yahoo.com.au 2011-03-23 13:35:05 PDT --- (In reply to comment #6) (In reply to comment #5) That's a false consistency. T ^^ int is the common operation, not T ^^ T. Really. BigInt ^^ BigInt isn't a

[Issue 5765] ^^ and with BigInts

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5765 --- Comment #8 from bearophile_h...@eml.cc 2011-03-23 16:40:37 PDT --- (In reply to comment #7) They are not system languages. The comparison is irrelevant. Well, Lisp was used plenty as a system language. D wants to be a multi-purpose

[Issue 5765] ^^ and with BigInts

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5765 Don clugd...@yahoo.com.au changed: What|Removed |Added CC||clugd...@yahoo.com.au ---

[Issue 5765] ^^ and with BigInts

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5765 --- Comment #2 from bearophile_h...@eml.cc 2011-03-22 02:29:39 PDT --- Here n needs to be a BigInt, because of the second recursive call. So instead of writing 2^^n you need to write BigInt(2)^^n.toInt() that's not natural (this code will