Re: Someone


"Luis A. Afonso" wrote:
Someone


I notice that someone had consulted people from a Basic news (alt. lang. basic) in order to check my program *Binomial* exactness due to his weakness in this program language.

And that "someone", Reef Fish, had found the reasons for the logical
inconsistencies of some BASIC languages in their implementation of
FOR - NEXT loops.

a) I was wrong (because I make only programming errors),

In several occasions in the matching birthday programs.
In the normal probability program.

To name just the most recent few.


b) After to compare with another language (speakeasy) by *copying* my program he notice that it outputted an error message.

After Afonso suggested to other to do exactly THAT for those who
don't use his obsolete QBASIC or whatever version of it.


*Eureka!*, he shout out, it is the proof of Luis error.

By logical inference, both in examining the CODE (before it was run)
and actually running it in a superior language that admits the FOR-NEXT
loop.

The raison he found: speakeasy is a more recent language (!?).

No question about it. The same language is portable to
super-computers
and any of the most recent generations of computers. BTW, you should
have learned the word "reason" by now.

c) When I remarked that I though he was not right because I had
verify the program provided exact results he call me a LIAR.

I called you a LIAR on the various PREVIOUS occasions in which you
were caught LYING (red-handed).

In the present case, I wanted to see the result of an actual RUN of
your program (and if your Qbasic had been an EARLIER version,
subject to the OLD ANSI standards, it WOULD have resulted in
an execution error).

I even suggested how you could test the cases I tested when I
finally got hold of a qb1 (probably different from all the other
BASIC languages too) to have traced the exact reason WHY it
ran -- which I have since indicated why it was ILLOGICAL and
INCONSISTENT with the QuickBasic allowance of NEGATIVE
steps.

If you had simple shown your ACTUAL execution, rather than
your statement that only an idiot would want a program to find
nC0, there would have been no speculation on the matter.


a) Because his lack of this language knowledge he should firstly (as all civilized persons do) to take advice from someone with sufficient expertise in this particular.

That was exactly what I did, about BASIC, even though I knew quite
a bit about it already.

b) After what he could claim, if so, that an error was found.

The error was the convention of IGNORING a LOOP before the
it was excuted ONCE.


Conclusion: My program provides exact values of nCx whatever the inputs obeying to the indicated input ranges (n<=50, x<=25).

Even THAT is a grossly misleading, if not FALSE statement.
n does NOT have to be less than or equal to 50, NOR x less
than or equal to 25, for the program to provide the EXACT values.

The program give the correct exact value of 5,461,512 for 60C55

The program also gives 100C95 = 7,528,752 correctly.

The program can even find 200C195 and give its exact value of
253,565.004.

The program can even give the EXACT value of 1000C997
to be 16,616,700.

In Afonso's ignorance about computational precision, he failed
to realize that his Qbasic, in double precision, is CAPABLE of
delivering only UP to 14 correct significant figures. That's the
only restriction (other than program overflow for excessively
large n and x).

But the program gives EXACT values to ANY combination whose
exact value is 14 digits or less.


And I am NOT a liar.

_______licas (Luis A. Afonso)

Not THIS time, being a RARE exception. :-) But STILL made
grossly misleading statement about your unnecessary, poorly
written QBasic program for the evaluation of Combinations.

THAT's the bottom line.

-- Bob.

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Question about floats and mods...
    ... > How do some computer programs calculate the modulo of a float if ... equivalence class in number theory context (e.g., ... and no longer recall the exact syntax. ... EXCEL, it is whatever the language says it is, like in another response. ...
    (sci.math.num-analysis)
  • RE: Why cant overloads take into account the return type.
    ... I think the straight answer to this question is that YES, a language can be ... implemented such that the return type can be taken into account during ... should do the same exact thing to the same exact set of inputs. ... > double FromString(string SomeValue) ...
    (microsoft.public.dotnet.languages.csharp)
  • Re: Course rules
    ... (The following is from an avid golfer who is not an expert on the exact ... language of the rules....) ... Nothing makes me madder than striping one down the middle of the ...
    (rec.sport.golf)
  • Re: Does sizeof(char) always equal to 1?
    ... >> Thank you for all your replies. ... The C language doesn't require that such a type exists. ... The C99 standard states that if an implementation has exact width 8, ...
    (comp.lang.c)
  • Re: Function to extract values
    ... If you don't need a full-word match, you can just use the InStr function to ... do a nested loop: outer loop iterates through each name in column A. Inner ... It becomes more complicated if you need an exact match of the full word. ... with the individual words within that string, ...
    (microsoft.public.excel.programming)