Subj : Re: Reversing a number
To   : comp.programming
From : Antoon Pardon
Date : Fri Sep 16 2005 12:49 pm

Op 2005-09-16, Willem schreef <willem@stack.nl>:
> Antoon wrote:
> ) Op 2005-09-16, Willem schreef <willem@stack.nl>:
> )> For your information, this is the algorithm:
> )>
> )>   f(x) = x * (10^trunc(log10(x)+1)+1)
> )
> )> No strings.  Your claim that 'the problem definition involves strings'
> )> implies automatically that 'the solution involves strings' is unfounded.
> )
> )> Unless you claim that these numbers are actually strings (see below).
> )
> ) You are working with number coded strings.
>
> Ah.  And now, we go way back to where this discussion started.
>
> The claim was something like:
>   "This algorithm is essentially converting a number to a string."
>
> If you claim that the numbers used are actually number coded strings,
> then 'converting a number to a string' must mean 'converting the encoding
> from number encoding to string encoding'.
>
> Which the algorithm in question does *not* do.  In your view it treats
> numbers as strings, but no actual conversion takes place.

You make a good point, so I'll drop it here, although I'm not 100%
convinced.

-- 
Antoon Pardon

.