Let's assume that I have n=1234 and I want to get the first x digits of n. Assume x=2, in C math I just compute 1234/100 and I will get 12. But how can I do it programatically? I.e., using math.
I have implemented it by the horrible way, converting to string and putting a 0 at x position.
If possible, I want to avoid built-in C functions because my goal is to convert the algorithm to assembly language later.
Without using any library functions, the best way to do it is with brute force. The maximum value an integer can take is 2147483648 so we won't deal with anything over that.
int first_two(int value)
{
assert(value >= 0); // unspecified for negative numbers
if (value >= 1000000000)
return value / 100000000;
if (value >= 100000000)
return value / 10000000;
if (value >= 10000000)
return value / 1000000;
if (value >= 1000000)
return value / 100000;
if (value >= 100000)
return value / 10000;
if (value >= 10000)
return value / 1000;
if (value >= 1000)
return value / 100;
if (value >= 100)
return value / 10;
return value;
}
You can do it programmatically by taking the floor of the decimal logarithm of your number (in case of 1234, it's floor(3.091315), which is 3), adding one, and subtracting n - the desired number of decimal digits. This would give you x such that integer-dividing the original value by 10^x gives you the desired result:
#include <math.h>
...
int num = 12345;
int n = 3;
int log10 = (log(num)/log(10))+1;
int divisor = pow(10, log10-n);
int res = num / divisor;
printf("%d\n", res);
Here is a demo on ideone.
Converting the above to assembly would be tricky because of the math functions involved. You can simplify it by defining a table of powers of ten, searching it for the first item that's greater than or equal to the desired number (giving you log10 above) and then grabbing the log10-n-th entry, giving you pow(10, log10-n):
int pow10[] = {1, 10, 100, 1000, 10000, 100000, 1000000, 10000000, 100000000, 1000000000};
int main(void) {
int num = 12345;
int n = 3;
int log10 = 0;
while (pow10[log10] < num) {
log10++;
}
int divisor = pow10[log10-n];
int res = num / divisor;
printf("log10(num)+1=%d, divisor=%d, result=%d\n", log10, divisor, res);
return 0;
}
Here is the modified demo.
You can use the following algorithm: keep divide the n per 10 till you get n < 10^x
here after the code
int power10(int x) {
int p = 1;
while (x) {
p *= 10;
x--;
}
return p;
}
int main (void) {
int x = 2;
int n = 1234;
int max = power10(x);
int res = n;
while(res>=max)
res = res/10;
printf("%d\n",res);
}
int getLeftDigits(double num, double numOfDigits)
{
double divider = pow(10, numOfDigits);
if (num < divider)
return num;
getLeftDigits(num/10, numOfDigits);
}
If you want to avoid the use of the pow function, you can just implement it by yourself as shown in one of the other comments here.
Related
I'm trying to code a program that can tell apart real and fake credit card numbers using Luhn's algorithm in C, which is
Multiply every other digit by 2, starting with the number’s
second-to-last digit, and then add those products’ digits together.
Add the sum to the sum of the digits that weren’t multiplied by 2.
If the total’s last digit is 0 (or, put more formally, if the total
modulo 10 is congruent to 0), the number is valid!
Then I coded something like this (I already declared all the functions at the top and included all the necessary libraries)
//Luhn's Algorithm
int luhn(long z)
{
int c;
return c = (sumall(z)-sumodd(z)) * 2 + sumaodd(z);
}
//sum of digits in odd position starting from the end
int sumodd(long x)
{
int a;
while(x)
{
a = a + x % 10;
x /= 100;
}
return a;
}
//sum of all digits
int sumall(long y)
{
int b;
while(y)
{
b = b + y % 10;
y /= 10;
}
return b;
}
But somehow it always gives out the wrong answer even though there's no error or bug detected. I came to notice that it works fine when my variable z stands alone, but when it's used multiple times in the same line of code with different functions, their values get messed up (in function luhn). I'm writing this to ask for any fix I can make to make my code run correctly as I intended.
I'd appreciate any help as I'm very new to this, and I'm not a native English speaker so I may have messed up some technical terms, but I hope you'd be able to understand my concerns.
sumall is wrong.
It should be sumeven from:
Add the sum to the sum of the digits that weren’t multiplied by 2.
Your sumall is summing all digits instead of the non-odd (i.e. even) digits.
You should do the * 2 inside sumodd as it should not be applied to the other [even] sum. And, it should be applied to the individual digits [vs the total sum].
Let's start with a proper definition from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luhn_algorithm
The check digit is computed as follows:
If the number already contains the check digit, drop that digit to form the "payload." The check digit is most often the last digit.
With the payload, start from the rightmost digit. Moving left, double the value of every second digit (including the rightmost digit).
Sum the digits of the resulting value in each position (using the original value where a digit did not get doubled in the previous step).
The check digit is calculated by 10 − ( s mod 10 )
Note that if we have a credit card of 9x where x is the check digit, then the payload is 9.
The correct [odd] sum for that digit is: 9 * 2 --> 18 --> 1 + 8 --> 9
But, sumodd(9x) * 2 --> 9 * 2 --> 18
Here's what I came up with:
// digsum -- calculate sum of digits
static inline int
digsum(int digcur)
{
int sum = 0;
for (; digcur != 0; digcur /= 10)
sum += digcur % 10;
return sum;
}
// luhn -- luhn's algorithm using digits array
int
luhn(long z)
{
char digits[16] = { 0 };
// get check digit and remove from "payload"
int check_expected = z % 10;
z /= 10;
// split into digits (we use little-endian)
int digcnt = 0;
for (digcnt = 0; z != 0; ++digcnt, z /= 10)
digits[digcnt] = z % 10;
int sum = 0;
for (int digidx = 0; digidx < digcnt; ++digidx) {
int digcur = digits[digidx];
if ((digidx & 1) == 0)
sum += digsum(digcur * 2);
else
sum += digcur;
}
int check_actual = 10 - (sum % 10);
return (check_actual == check_expected);
}
// luhn -- luhn's algorithm using long directly
int
luhn2(long z)
{
// get check digit and remove from "payload"
int check_expected = z % 10;
z /= 10;
int sum = 0;
for (int digidx = 0; z != 0; ++digidx, z /= 10) {
int digcur = z % 10;
if ((digidx & 1) == 0)
sum += digsum(digcur * 2);
else
sum += digcur;
}
int check_actual = 10 - (sum % 10);
return (check_actual == check_expected);
}
You've invoked undefined behavior by not initializing a few local variables in your functions, for instance you can remove your undefined behaviour in sumodd() by initializing a to zero like so:
//sum of digits in odd position starting from the end
int sumodd(long x)
{
int a = 0; //Initialize
while(x)
{
a += x % 10; //You can "a += b" instead of "a = a + b"
x /= 100;
}
return a;
}
It's also important to note that long is only required to be a minimum of 4-bytes wide, so it is not guaranteed to be wide enough to represent a decimal-16-digit-integer. Using long long solves this problem.
Alternatively you may find this problem much easier to solve by treating your credit card number as a char[] instead of an integer type altogether, for instance if we assume a 16-digit credit card number:
int luhn(long long z){
char number[16]; //Convert CC number to array of digits and store them here
for(int c = 0; c < 16; ++c){
number[c] = z % 10; //Last digit is at number[0], first digit is at number[15]
z /= 10;
}
int sum = 0;
for(int c = 0; c < 16; c += 2){
sum += number[c] + number[c + 1] * 2; //Sum the even digits and the doubled odd digits
}
return sum;
}
...and you could skip the long long to char[] translation part altogether if you treat the credit card number as an array of digits in the whole program
This expression:
(sumall(z)-sumodd(z)) * 2 + sumall(z);
Should be:
((sumall(z)-sumodd(z)) * 2 + sumodd(z))%10;
Based on your own definition.
But how about:
(sumall(z) * 2 - sumodd(z))%10
If you're trying to be smart and base off sumall(). You don't need to call anything twice.
Also you don't initialise your local variables. You must assign variables values before using them in C.
Also you don't need the local variable c in the luhn() function. It's harmless but unnecessary.
As others mention in a real-world application we can't recommend enough that such 'codes' are held in a character array. The amount of grief caused by people using integer types to represent digit sequence 'codes' and identifiers is vast. Unless a variable represents a numerical quantity of something, don't represent it as an arithmetic type. More issue has been caused in my career by that error than people trying to use double to represent monetary amounts.
#include <stdio.h>
//sum of digits in odd position starting from the end
int sumodd(long x)
{
int a=0;
while(x)
{
a = a + x % 10;
x /= 100;
}
return a;
}
//sum of all digits
int sumall(long y)
{
int b=0;
while(y)
{
b = b + y % 10;
y /= 10;
}
return b;
}
//Luhn's Algorithm
int luhn(long z)
{
return (sumall(z)*2-sumodd(z))%10;
}
int check_luhn(long y,int expect){
int result=luhn(y);
if(result==expect){
return 0;
}
return 1;
}
int check_sumodd(long y,int expect){
int result=sumodd(y);
if(result==expect){
return 0;
}
return 1;
}
int check_sumall(long y,int expect){
int result=sumall(y);
if(result==expect){
return 0;
}
return 1;
}
int main(void) {
int errors=0;
errors+=check_sumall(1,1);
errors+=check_sumall(12,3);
errors+=check_sumall(123456789L,45);
errors+=check_sumall(4273391,4+2+7+3+3+9+1);
errors+=check_sumodd(1,1);
errors+=check_sumodd(91,1);
errors+=check_sumodd(791,8);
errors+=check_sumodd(1213191,1+1+1+1);
errors+=check_sumodd(4273391,15);
errors+=check_luhn(1234567890,((9+7+5+3+1)*2+(0+8+6+4+2))%10);
errors+=check_luhn(9264567897,((9+7+5+6+9)*2+(7+8+6+4+2))%10);
if(errors!=0){
printf("*ERRORS*\n");
}else{
printf("Success\n");
}
return 0;
}
I am trying to construct a simple program which adds together the digits of a long number. I attempted to do this by using a loop employing the modulo operator and some basic arithmetic. I want to increment the modulo operator by multiplying it by ten on each iteration of the loop in order to reach the next digit. I want to check if my code is correct, however, I receive errors pertaining to the lines involving the modulo operations and I'm not quite sure why.
This was my attempted construction:
{
long i = 0;
long b;
int m = 1;
do
{
long number = get_long("Number?\n");
long a = number % m;
b = number - a;
long c = b % m x 10;
long d = c / m;
{
i = i + d;
}
{
m = m x 10
}
}
while (b > 0);
printf("%ld\n", i);
}
Edit:
I made the basic error of writing "x" instead of "*". However, having fixed this, I no longer receive errors, but the program simply returns "0". Any diagnosis would be appreciated.
int main(void)
{
long i = 0;
long b;
int m = 10;
long number = get_long("Number?\n");
do
{
long a = number % m;
b = number - a;
long c = b % m * 10;
long d = c / m;
{
i = i + d;
}
{
m = m * 10;
}
}
while (b > 0);
printf("%ld\n", i);
}
For your revised code:
long c = b % m * 10;
this line will evaluate (b % m) and then multiply it by 10 because of the order of operations.
I presume what you actually want is:
long c = b % (m * 10);
Secondly, the following line determines which digit you start at:
int m = 10;
and this line determines how many digits between the ones you include in your total:
m = m * 10;
So for this configuration, it will start at the 2nd digit from the right and add every digit.
So for the number 1234, you'd get 3 + 2 + 1 = 6.
If you want to add every digit, you could set:
int m = 10;
and you'd get 4 + 3 + 2 + 1 = 10.
Alternatively, if you had used:
m = m * 10;
you'd have 3 + 1 = 4.
First, you're likely getting errors due to these lines:
long c = b % m x 10;
m = m x 10
This is because x is not a valid operator.
The multiplication operator is *:
long c = b % m * 10;
m = m * 10;
As for your approach, I would suggest, instead of changing the modulo operand, you simply divide the original number by 10 to shift it one digit each operation.
For example:
#include <stdio.h>
int main()
{
int sumofdigits = 0;
int num = 12345;
while(num > 0) {
sumofdigits += num % 10;
num /= 10;
}
printf("%d", sumofdigits);
return 0;
}
The reduced-sum of the digits of a number is the same as that number modulo 9.
Example:
#include <stdio.h>
int main(void) {
int number = 57283;
printf("%d \n", number%9);
// 5 + 7 + 2 + 8 + 3 == 25 ==> 2 + 5 == 7
// 57283 % 9 == 7
return 0;
}
If you want to use loops to get the reduced sum:
int sum_of_digits(int num)
{
int sum;
do
{
sum = 0;
while(num)
{
sum += num%10;
num /= 10;
}
num = sum;
} while (sum >9);
return sum;
}
But if you only want the simple sum of digits (one pass only):
int sum_of_digits(int num)
{
int sum = 0;
while(num)
{
sum += num%10;
num /= 10;
}
return sum;
}
You have to find the sum of the digits of a variable of type long by the two operators modulo (%) and division (/), you start with the operator modulo to find the remainder of the division (the digits) then, you add this degit to the sum, then you do the division / 10 to overwrite (the summed digit) until the number is equal to 0 like this:
int main()
{
long number=0,m=0;
printf("Give a number :");
scanf("%ld",&number);
long s=0,temp=number;
while(number != 0)
{
m=number%10;
s+=m;
number/=10;
}
printf("\n%The sum of the digits of the Number %ld is : %ld\n",temp,s);
}
Problem statement :
Given a 32-bit signed integer, reverse digits of an integer.
Note: Assume we are dealing with an environment that could only store
integers within the 32-bit signed integer range: [ −2^31, 2^31 − 1]. For
the purpose of this problem, assume that your function returns 0 when
the reversed integer overflows.
I'm trying to implement the recursive function reverseRec(), It's working for smaller values but it's a mess for the edge cases.
int reverseRec(int x)
{
if(abs(x)<=9)
{
return x;
}
else
{
return reverseRec(x/10) + ((x%10)*(pow(10, (floor(log10(abs(x)))))));
}
}
I've implemented non recursive function which is working just fine :
int reverse(int x)
{
long long val = 0;
do{
val = val*10 + (x%10);
x /= 10;
}while(x);
return (val < INT_MIN || val > INT_MAX) ? 0 : val;
}
Here I use variable val of long long type to check the result with MAX and MIN of signed int type but the description of the problem specifically mentioned that we need to deal within the range of 32-bit integer, although somehow it got accepted but I'm just curious If there is a way to implement a recursive function using only int datatype ?
One more thing even if I consider using long long I'm failing to implement it in the recursive function reverseRec().
If there is a way to implement a recursive function using only int datatype ?
(and) returns 0 when the reversed integer overflows
Yes.
For such +/- problems, I like to fold the int values to one side and negate as needed. The folding to one side (- or +) simplifies overflow detection as only a single side needs testing
I prefer folding to the negative side as there are more negatives, than positives. (With 32-bit int, really didn't make any difference for this problem.)
As code forms the reversed value, test if the following r * 10 + least_digit may overflow before doing it.
An int only recursive solution to reverse an int. Overflow returns 0.
#include <limits.h>
#include <stdio.h>
static int reverse_recurse(int i, int r) {
if (i) {
int least_digit = i % 10;
if (r <= INT_MIN / 10 && (r < INT_MIN / 10 || least_digit < INT_MIN % 10)) {
return 1; /// Overflow indication
}
r = reverse_recurse(i / 10, r * 10 + least_digit);
}
return r;
}
// Reverse an int, overflow returns 0
int reverse_int(int i) {
// Proceed with negative values, they have more range than + side
int r = reverse_recurse(i > 0 ? -i : i, 0);
if (r > 0) {
return 0;
}
if (i > 0) {
if (r < -INT_MAX) {
return 0;
}
r = -r;
}
return r;
}
Test
int main(void) {
int t[] = {0, 1, 42, 1234567890, 1234567892, INT_MAX, INT_MIN};
for (unsigned i = 0; i < sizeof t / sizeof t[0]; i++) {
printf("%11d %11d\n", t[i], reverse_int(t[i]));
if (t[i] != INT_MIN) {
printf("%11d %11d\n", -t[i], reverse_int(-t[i]));
}
}
}
Output
0 0
0 0
1 1
-1 -1
42 24
-42 -24
1234567890 987654321
-1234567890 -987654321
1234567892 0
-1234567892 0
2147483647 0
-2147483647 0
-2147483648 0
You could add a second parameter:
int reverseRec(int x, int reversed)
{
if(x == 0)
{
return reversed;
}
else
{
return reverseRec(x/10, reversed * 10 + x%10);
}
}
And call the function passing the 0 for the second parameter. If you want negative numbers you can check the sign before and pass the absolute value to this function.
In trying to learn C programming I programed this question and get some correct results and some incorrect. I don't see the reason for the difference.
#include <stdio.h>
#include <string.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <math.h> // requires adding link to math -lm as in: gcc b.c -lm -o q11
int ReverseInt(int startValue, int decimalPlace)
{
if(decimalPlace == 0) // if done returns value
{
return startValue;
}
int temp = startValue % 10; // gets units digit
int newStart = (startValue -temp)/10; // computes new starting value after removing one digit
int newDecimal = decimalPlace -1;
int value = temp*pow(10,decimalPlace);
return value + ReverseInt(newStart,newDecimal); // calls itself recursively until done
}
int main()
{
int x, decimalP, startValue;
printf("Input number to be reversed \n Please note number must be less than 214748364 :");
scanf("%d", &x);
if (x > 214748364)
{
printf("Input number to be reversed \n Please note number must be less than 214748364 :");
scanf("%d", &x);
}
decimalP = round(log10(x)); // computes the number of powers of 10 - 0 being units etc.
startValue = ReverseInt(x, decimalP); // calls function with number to be reversed and powers of 10
printf("\n reverse of %d is %d \n", x, startValue);
}
Output is: reverse of 1234 is 4321 but then reverse of 4321 is 12340
It's late and nothing better does not come into my mind. No float calculations. Of course, integer has to be big enough to accommodate the result. Otherwise it is an UB.
int rev(int x, int partial, int *max)
{
int result;
if(x / partial < 10 && (int)(x / partial) > -10)
{
*max = partial;
return abs(x % 10) * partial;
}
result = rev(x, partial * 10, max) + abs(((x / (int)(*max / partial)) % 10) * partial);
return result;
}
int reverse(int x)
{
int max;
return rev(x, 1, &max) * ((x < 0) ? -1 : 1);
}
int main(void){
printf("%d", reverse(-456789));
}
https://godbolt.org/z/M1eezf
unsigned rev(unsigned x, unsigned partial, unsigned *max)
{
unsigned result;
if(x / partial < 10)
{
*max = partial;
return (x % 10) * partial;
}
result = rev(x, partial * 10, max) + (x / (*max / partial) % 10) * partial;
return result;
}
unsigned reverse(unsigned x)
{
unsigned max;
return rev(x, 1, &max);
}
int main(void){
printf("%u", reverse(123456));
}
when using long long to store the result all possible integers can be reversed
long long rev(int x, long long partial, long long *max)
{
long long result;
if(x / partial < 10 && (int)(x / partial) > -10)
{
*max = partial;
return abs(x % 10) * partial;
}
result = rev(x, partial * 10, max) + abs(((x / (int)(*max / partial)) % 10) * partial);
return result;
}
long long reverse(int x)
{
long long max;
return rev(x, 1, &max) * ((x < 0) ? -1 : 1);
}
int main(void){
printf("%d reversed %lld\n", INT_MIN, reverse(INT_MIN));
printf("%d reversed %lld\n", INT_MAX, reverse(INT_MAX));
}
https://godbolt.org/z/KMfbxz
I am assuming by reversing an integer you mean turning 129 to 921 or 120 to 21.
You need an initial method to initialize your recursive function.
Your recursive function must figure out how many decimal places your integer uses. This can be found by using log base 10 with the value and then converting the result to a integer.
log10 (103) approx. 2.04 => 2
Modulus the initial value by 10 to get the ones place and store it in a variable called temp
Subtract the ones place from the initial value and store that in a variable called newStart.
divide this value by 10
Subtract one from the decimal place and store in another variable called newDecimal.
Return the ones place times 10 to the power of the decimal place and add it to the function where the initial value is newStart and the decimalPlace is newDecimal.
#include <stdio.h>
#include <math.h>
int ReverseInt(int startValue, int decimalPlace);
int main()
{
int i = -54;
int positive = i < 0? i*-1 : i;
double d = log10(positive);
int output = ReverseInt(positive,(int)d);
int correctedOutput = i < 0? output*-1 : output;
printf("%d \n",correctedOutput);
return 0;
}
int ReverseInt(int startValue, int decimalPlace)
{
if(decimalPlace == 0)
{
return startValue;
}
int temp = startValue % 10;
int newStart = (startValue -temp)/10;
int newDecimal = decimalPlace -1;
int value = temp*pow(10,decimalPlace);
return value + ReverseInt(newStart,newDecimal);
}
I need to redo printf for a projet, so I actually have a problem with the conversion of float.
I managed to convert almost everything but for the number 1254451555.6
I got an issue: I got 1254451555.59999.
I think it's the calculation to keep the part after the . that doesnt work.
nbr = ((n - nbr) * 100000000);
I tried different things but I haven't managed to fix it yet.
Do you have any idea?
int getlenghtitoa(long long n, int nbase)
{
int i;
i = 0;
while (n >= 0)
{
n /= nbase;
i++;
if (n == 0)
break ;
}
return (i);
}
float ft_nbconv(float n, int i)
{
while (i-- > 0)
n = n *10;
return (n);
}
int ft_power(long long nbr)
{
int i;
i = 1;
while(nbr > 10)
{
i *= 10;
nbr = nbr / 10;
}
return (i);
}
char *ft_conver_f(long double n)
{
char *dest;
int i;
int a;
long long int nbr;
int power;
nbr = (long long) n;
i = getlenghtitoa((long long )n, 10);
if (!(dest = malloc(sizeof(char) * (i + 8))))
return (0);
a = i;
i = 0;
power = ft_power(nbr);
while (a--)
{
dest[i++] = ((nbr / power) % 10) + '0';
if (power != 1)
power /= 10;
}
dest[i++] = '.';
nbr = ((n - nbr) * 100000000);
power = 10000000;
while (a++ < 5)
{
if (a == 5)
if ((((nbr / power)) % 10) >= 5)
{
dest[i++] = ((nbr / power) % 10 + 1) + '0';
break;
}
dest[i++] = ((nbr / power) % 10) + '0';
power /= 10;
}
dest[i] = '\0';
return (dest);
}
Most decimal fractions cannot be represented exactly as binary fractions. A consequence is that, in general, the decimal floating-point numbers you enter are only approximated by the binary floating-point numbers actually stored in the machine.
That's why when implementing a printf, the only way to really be able to convert a floating number to a 2-seperated-by-point integers, is by using the precision factor and rounding manually.
If you are not required to implement the precision, the default is 6.
(Precision is the number of places to print after the dot (and it's rounded)).
And that's what's missing in your implementation.
Let's call the digits before the dot the ipart and the digits after the fpart .
nbr = ((n - nbr) * 100000000);
This should be
nbr = ((n - nbr) * 10000000); // 7 zeros
// nbr is now equal to 5999999
if (nbr % 10 >= 5)
{
nbr = nbr / 10 + 1;
}
else
nbr = nbr / 10;
This way, you get 7 digits after the dot, see if the last one is higher than 5, if it is, you add +1 to nbr (after dividing by 10 to make sure nbr has 6 digits), if it's not, you just divide by 10.
One more note about this rounding method, It will not be able to carry the rounding from the fpart to the ipart .
what if you want to print 3.9999999 ? It should print 4.000000. That means that can't just convert the ipart to a string from the beginning, because sometimes rounding the fpart will add +1 to your ipart
So think about creating a function ltoa for example that takes a long long int and converts it to a string, complete the piece of code about rounding i just gave you to make sure rounding can be carried to the ipart , then convert the whole thing to string using something like
dest = join(ltoa(ipart), ".", ltoa(fpart)).
A couple more notes, your function does not handle negative numbers.
And your int ft_pow can be easily flooded, so consider changing to long long ft_pow
I have a logical problem in my code, maybe it is caused by overflowing but I can't solve this on my own, so I would be thankful if anyone can help me.
In the following piece of code, I have implemented the function taylor_log(), which can count "n" iterations of taylor polynomial. In the void function I am looking for number of iterations (*limit) which is enough to count a logarithm with desired accuracy compared to log function from .
The thing is that sometimes UINT_MAX is not enough iterations to get the desired accuracy and at this point I want to let the user know that the number of needed iterations is higher than UINT_MAX. But my code don't work, for example for x = 1e+280, eps = 623. It just counts, counts and never give result.
TaylorPolynomial
double taylor_log(double x, unsigned int n){
double f_sum = 1.0;
double sum = 0.0;
for (unsigned int i = 1; i <= n; i++)
{
f_sum *= (x - 1) / x;
sum += f_sum / i;
}
return sum;
}
void guessIt(double x, double eps, unsigned int *limit){
*limit = 10;
double real_log = log(x);
double t_log = taylor_log(x, *limit);
while(myabs(real_log - t_log) > eps)
{
if (*limit == UINT_MAX)
{
*limit = 0;
break;
}
if (*limit >= UINT_MAX/2)
{
*limit = UINT_MAX;
t_log = taylor_log(x, *limit);
}
else
{
*limit = (*limit) *2;
t_log = taylor_log(x, *limit);
}
}
}
EDIT: Ok guys, thanks for your reactions so far. I have changed my code to this:
if (*limit == UINT_MAX-1)
{
*limit = 0;
break;
}
if (*limit >= UINT_MAX/2)
{
*limit = UINT_MAX-1;
t_log = taylor_log(x, *limit);
}
but it still doesn't work correctly, I have set printf to the beggining of taylor_log() function to see the value of "n" and its (..., 671088640, 1342177280, 2684354560, 5, 4, 3, 2, 2, 1, 2013265920, ...). Don't understand it..
This code below assigns the limit to UINT_MAX
if (*limit >= UINT_MAX/2)
{
*limit = UINT_MAX;
t_log = taylor_log(x, *limit);
}
And your for loop is defined like this:
for (unsigned int i = 1; i <= n; i++)
i will ALWAYS be less than or equal to UINT_MAX because there is never going to be a value of i that is greater than UINT_MAX. Because that's the largest value i could ever be. So there is certainly overflow and your loop exit condition is never met. i rolls over to zero and the process repeats indefinitely.
You should change your loop condition to i < n or change your limit to UINT_MAX - 1.
[Edit]
OP coded correctly but must insure a limited range (0.5 < x < 2.0 ?)
Below is a code version that self determines when to stop. Iteration count goes high near x near 0.5 and 2.0. The iteration count needed goes into the millions. Such the alternative coded far below.
double taylor_logA(double x) {
double f_sum = 1.0;
double sum = 0.0;
for (unsigned int i = 1; ; i++) {
f_sum *= (x - 1) / x;
double sum_before = sum;
sum += f_sum / i;
if (sum_before == sum) {
printf("%d\n", i);
break;
}
}
return sum;
}
Wrongalternative implementation of the series: Ref
Sample alternative - it converges faster.
double taylor_log2(double x, unsigned int n) {
double f_sum = 1.0;
double sum = 0.0;
for (unsigned int i = 1; i <= n; i++) {
f_sum *= (x - 1) / 1; // / 1 (or remove)
if (i & 1) sum += f_sum / i;
else sum -= f_sum / i; // subtract even terms
}
return sum;
}
A reasonable number of terms will converge as needed.
Alternatively, continue until terms are too small (maybe 50 or so)
double taylor_log3(double x) {
double f_sum = 1.0;
double sum = 0.0;
for (unsigned int i = 1; ; i++) {
double sum_before = sum;
f_sum *= x - 1;
if (i & 1) sum += f_sum / i;
else sum -= f_sum / i;
if (sum_before == sum) {
printf("%d\n", i);
break;
}
}
return sum;
}
Other improvements possible. example see More efficient series
First, using std::numeric_limits<unsigned int>::max() will make your code more c++-ish than c-ish. Second, you can use the integral type unsigned long long and std::numeric_limits<unsigned long long>::max() for the limit, which is pretty mush the limit for an integral type. If you want a higher limit, you may use long double. floating points also allows you to use infinity with std::numeric_limits<double>::infinity() note that infinity work with double, float and long double.
If neither of these types provide you the precision you need, look at boost::multiprecision
First of all, the Taylor series for the logarithm function only converges for values of 0 < x < 2, so it's quite possible that the eps precision is never hit.
Secondly, are you sure that it loops forever, instead of hitting the *limit >= UINT_MAX/2 after a very long time?
OP is using the series well outside its usable range of 0.5 x < 2.0 with calls like taylor_log(1e280, n)
Even within the range, x values near the limits of 0.5 and 2.0 converge very slowly needing millions+ of iterations. A precise log() will not result. Best to use the 2x range about 1.0.
Create a wrapper function to call the original function in its sweet range of sqrt(2)/2 < x < sqrt(2). Converges, worst case, with about 40 iterations.
#define SQRT_0_5 0.70710678118654752440084436210485
#define LN2 0.69314718055994530941723212145818
// Valid over the range (0...DBL_MAX]
double taylor_logB(double x, unsigned int n) {
int expo;
double signif = frexp(x, &expo);
if (signif < SQRT_0_5) {
signif *= 2;
expo--;
}
double y = taylor_log(signif,n);
y += expo*LN2;
return y;
}