OpenEuphoria

Re: Current implementation of exp() is faulty.

• Posted by Jason Gade <jaygade at yaho?.com> May 08, 2008
• 764 views

CChris wrote:
> Results:
> {253,231,104,139,8,235,188,65}
> {3,232,104,139,8,235,188,65}
> {152,124,211,84,22,222,3,65}
> {154,124,211,84,22,222,3,65}
> {93,5,149,207,157,130,213,64}
> {97,5,149,207,157,130,213,64}
> {108,12,71,125,234,73,167,64}
> {110,12,71,125,234,73,167,64}
> {141,192,144,86,220,54,121,64}
> {142,192,144,86,220,54,121,64}
> {142,51,112,153,56,141,98,64}
> {142,51,112,153,56,141,98,64}

You can see what I'm saying right here in your output -- the differences are in
the least significant bits (the first element or two of the sequence). Try
converting these byte sequences to numbers and then print out the decimal
representation of them and see if they match.

--
A complex system that works is invariably found to have evolved from a simple
system that works.
--John Gall's 15th law of Systemantics.

"Premature optimization is the root of all evil in programming."
--C.A.R. Hoare

j.