Re: "The art of computer programming" by Knuth
- From: Dave Seaman <dseaman@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 00:47:39 +0000 (UTC)
On Sun, 16 Oct 2005 23:50:45 GMT, New Guy wrote:
> On Mon, 17 Oct 2005 00:00:26 +0200, David Kastrup <dak@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>>larhamr@xxxxxxxxxxx writes:
>>
>>> mensanator@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> I would join it, although I'm not sure how keen I would be on
>>>> solving exercises. But that remains to be seen. So go ahead and
>>>> create it, post some seed messages to get the discussions started,
>>>> announce it here and wait and see if there's any interest.
>>>
>>> The term exercises may be misleading when referring to
>>> TAOCP. These are given rating numbers which range over:
>>>
>>> 00 Immediate
>>> 10 Simple (one minute)
>>> 20 Medium (quarter hour)
>>> 30 Moderately hard
>>> 40 Term project
>>> 50 Research problem
>>>
>>> In my copy of "Fundamental Algorithms" which is vol 1 of
>>> TAOCP, in the examples of problem ratings it has FLT as
>>> a 50.
>>
>>It has been rated down to HM45 in mine.
> HM45 does not appear in the rating scale above. Please let me know
> what it means.
HM means the solution involves higher math, and 45 is to be interpolated
between 40 and 50 in the indicated scale.
--
Dave Seaman
Judge Yohn's mistakes revealed in Mumia Abu-Jamal ruling.
<http://www.commoncouragepress.com/index.cfm?action=book&bookid=228>
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: "The art of computer programming" by Knuth
- From: Jim Spriggs
- Re: "The art of computer programming" by Knuth
- References:
- Re: "The art of computer programming" by Knuth
- From: mensanator@xxxxxxxxxxx
- Re: "The art of computer programming" by Knuth
- From: larhamr
- Re: "The art of computer programming" by Knuth
- Prev by Date: Re: Integer tetrahedron
- Next by Date: Re: Reading book about Riemann Hypothesis
- Previous by thread: Re: "The art of computer programming" by Knuth
- Next by thread: Re: "The art of computer programming" by Knuth
- Index(es):