flat assembler
Message board for the users of flat assembler.

Home Search Register
Log in to check your private messages Log in

flat assembler > Heap > What is the best pie you can get with 9 digits?

Goto page 1, 2, 3 ... 27, 28, 29  Next
Author
Thread Post new topic Reply to topic
revolution
When all else fails, read the source


Joined: 24 Aug 2004
Posts: 16125
Location: Hyperborea
You are allowed a maximum of nine ASCII characters (0x20-0x7e) only, this includes spaces and brackets etc., to write a representation of a number.

All standard mathematical symbols and functions etc. are allowed.

So I will start the ball rolling with:

"9+9+9+9+9"

But I'm sure you can do better.


Last edited by revolution on 09 Jan 2017, 19:18; edited 2 times in total
Post 06 Mar 2008, 03:09
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
sinsi



Joined: 10 Aug 2007
Posts: 685
Location: Adelaide
999999999

or something like 1e9999999

?

too bad there's not an infinity key... Laughing
Post 06 Mar 2008, 03:17
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
revolution
When all else fails, read the source


Joined: 24 Aug 2004
Posts: 16125
Location: Hyperborea
sinsi wrote:
too bad there's not an infinity key... Laughing
infinity is not a number anyway, so even if there was an infinity key it wouldn't count Wink
Post 06 Mar 2008, 04:00
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
revolution
When all else fails, read the source


Joined: 24 Aug 2004
Posts: 16125
Location: Hyperborea
sinsi wrote:
999999999
Accept

sinsi wrote:
1e9999999
Accept

Can anyone do better?
Post 06 Mar 2008, 04:01
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
sinsi



Joined: 10 Aug 2007
Posts: 685
Location: Adelaide
factorial? 99999999!
powers? 9^9^9^9^9 (might need brackets though)

The largest named number is googolplex - 10^googol (hah! 9 chars)
Post 06 Mar 2008, 04:39
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
bitRAKE



Joined: 21 Jul 2003
Posts: 2668
Location: dank orb
9^9^9^9^9 is a large number

Edit: ah, ya beat me to it Smile
How about 99^googol then

_________________
unlicense.org


Last edited by bitRAKE on 06 Mar 2008, 04:44; edited 1 time in total
Post 06 Mar 2008, 04:42
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
revolution
When all else fails, read the source


Joined: 24 Aug 2004
Posts: 16125
Location: Hyperborea
sinsi wrote:
99999999!
Accept
sinsi wrote:
9^9^9^9^9 (might need brackets though)
Accept. Without brackets use standard parsing to get the value
sinsi wrote:
10^googol
Accept

Can anyone do better?


Last edited by revolution on 06 Mar 2008, 04:46; edited 1 time in total
Post 06 Mar 2008, 04:42
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
revolution
When all else fails, read the source


Joined: 24 Aug 2004
Posts: 16125
Location: Hyperborea
bitRAKE wrote:
9^9^9^9^9 is a large number
Too late, sinsi beat you to it.
Post 06 Mar 2008, 04:44
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
bitRAKE



Joined: 21 Jul 2003
Posts: 2668
Location: dank orb
factorials!:

9^googol!
9!!!!!!!!

_________________
unlicense.org
Post 06 Mar 2008, 04:48
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
revolution
When all else fails, read the source


Joined: 24 Aug 2004
Posts: 16125
Location: Hyperborea
bitRAKE wrote:
9^googol!
Accept
bitRAKE wrote:
9!!!!!!!!
Accept, but not very big, multifactorials are maybe not what you expect.
Post 06 Mar 2008, 04:51
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
bitRAKE



Joined: 21 Jul 2003
Posts: 2668
Location: dank orb
Thanks for the link, superfactorial then:
9$$$$$$$$

_________________
unlicense.org
Post 06 Mar 2008, 04:54
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
sinsi



Joined: 10 Aug 2007
Posts: 685
Location: Adelaide
Nice link, how about a hyperfactorial - H(999999)

Wow, this is getting too esoteric for me...
Post 06 Mar 2008, 05:00
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
revolution
When all else fails, read the source


Joined: 24 Aug 2004
Posts: 16125
Location: Hyperborea
bitRAKE wrote:
9$$$$$$$$
Accept, (but what is the order of evaluation? I also don't know)

Can anyone do better?
Post 06 Mar 2008, 05:01
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
revolution
When all else fails, read the source


Joined: 24 Aug 2004
Posts: 16125
Location: Hyperborea
sinsi wrote:
H(999999)
Accept, but smaller than 9$$$$$$$$

Can anyone do better?
Post 06 Mar 2008, 05:02
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
Tomasz Grysztar
Assembly Artist


Joined: 16 Jun 2003
Posts: 6994
Location: Kraków, Poland
9($^9$$$)

the ^ applied to operator means the composition (so 9($^8)=9$$$$$$$$)

or even...

G($^G$$$)
Post 06 Mar 2008, 06:08
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
DOS386



Joined: 08 Dec 2006
Posts: 1904

-ln(0)
abs(1/0)
(1/0)^2
ta2(pi/2)
ro90("8")

Crying or Very sad


Last edited by DOS386 on 06 Mar 2008, 06:21; edited 3 times in total
Post 06 Mar 2008, 06:13
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
revolution
When all else fails, read the source


Joined: 24 Aug 2004
Posts: 16125
Location: Hyperborea
Tomasz Grysztar wrote:
9($^9$$$)
Accept, but not with the explanation below, only accept for ^=power, in which case it doesn't make sense really, but the syntax is allowed
Tomasz Grysztar wrote:
the ^ applied to operator means the composition (so 9($^8)=9$$$$$$$$)
Not accept, I don't think this is standard, you are not allowed to make up your own definition of symbols.
Tomasz Grysztar wrote:
G($^G$$$)
edit: Accept Graham's number.


Last edited by revolution on 08 Mar 2008, 13:28; edited 2 times in total
Post 06 Mar 2008, 06:15
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
revolution
When all else fails, read the source


Joined: 24 Aug 2004
Posts: 16125
Location: Hyperborea
DOS386 wrote:

-ln(0)
abs(1/0)
(1/0)^2
ta2(pi/2)
All not accept, results are undefined, or infinity, and thus not numbers.
Post 06 Mar 2008, 06:17
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
Tomasz Grysztar
Assembly Artist


Joined: 16 Jun 2003
Posts: 6994
Location: Kraków, Poland
revolution wrote:
Not accept, I don't think this is standard, you are not allowed to make up your own definition of symbols.

It is standard to denote the repeated function composition in the same way as a power of number, see functional powers. I explained what it means just in case someone didn't know it, I didn't "make up my own definition".
Post 06 Mar 2008, 06:23
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
revolution
When all else fails, read the source


Joined: 24 Aug 2004
Posts: 16125
Location: Hyperborea
Tomasz Grysztar wrote:
revolution wrote:
Not accept, I don't think this is standard, you are not allowed to make up your own definition of symbols.

It is standard to denote the repeated function composition in the same way as a power of number, see functional powers.
Okay then, I accept, but it doesn't feel right to me.

But it doesn't matter really, because, so far, no one has come even close to putting a REALLY big number.
Post 06 Mar 2008, 06:28
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
Display posts from previous:
Post new topic Reply to topic

Jump to:  
Goto page 1, 2, 3 ... 27, 28, 29  Next

< Last Thread | Next Thread >
Forum Rules:
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You can attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Main index Download Documentation Examples Message board

Copyright © 1999-2018, Tomasz Grysztar.

Powered by rwasa.