[QUOTE=science_man_88;239117]okay thanks now we can use your brains to finish both long multiply and determine if numerical.[/QUOTE]

I'd rather expand yours. :smile:

[QUOTE=CRGreathouse;239118]I'd rather expand yours. :smile:[/QUOTE]

Good luck with that lol.

[CODE]longmultiply(a,b)= c=eval(Vec(Str(a)));d=eval(Vec(Str(b)));carry=0;answer=[];forstep(x=#d,1,[-1],forstep(y=#c,1,[-1],answer=concat(((c[y]*d[x])+carry)%10,answer);carry=floor((c[y]*d{x])/10))
*** sorry, embedded braces (in parser) is not yet implemented.[/CODE]

I can't figure out what's messing up and, Yes I've checked the braces just enough that it should work. Oh never mind stupid concat lol.

didn't work for calculating it before either.

I have a hard time believing [url=http://rosettacode.org/wiki/Pascal's_triangle]this[/url] hasn't been done.

[QUOTE=science_man_88;239122]Good luck with that lol.[/QUOTE]

It's already worked. Look at how much you can do with Pari now -- you hadn't even heard of it a year ago.

[QUOTE=science_man_88;239122]I can't figure out what's messing up and, Yes I've checked the braces just enough that it should work. Oh never mind stupid concat lol.[/QUOTE]

You wrote "{x]" instead of "[x]".

[QUOTE=science_man_88;239123]I have a hard time believing [url=http://rosettacode.org/wiki/Pascal's_triangle]this[/url] hasn't been done.[/QUOTE]

Essentially the only tasks that are done are the ones I did over the last four weeks. Sometimes I didn't do a task because it was easy and I thought anyone could do it; sometimes I left a task because I couldn't think of any nice way to do it; sometimes I couldn't think of any way to do it; sometimes I just didn't get around to it.

You may very well become the #2 Pari contributor on RC if you continue this way. (I don't know who presently has that title, but they couldn't have very many.)

[QUOTE=CRGreathouse;239126]Essentially the only tasks that are done are the ones I did over the last four weeks. Sometimes I didn't do a task because it was easy and I thought anyone could do it; sometimes I left a task because I couldn't think of any nice way to do it; sometimes I couldn't think of any way to do it; sometimes I just didn't get around to it.

You may very well become the #2 Pari contributor on RC if you continue this way. (I don't know who presently has that title, but they couldn't have very many.)[/QUOTE]

Yeah something missing in my code I know because answer became

[CODE][6, 9, 4, 6][/CODE]

instead of [CODE][7,3,6][/CODE]

Well, good luck debugging. Sometimes splitting the program into multiple functions helps, as does adding diagnostic messages with print(). (You remove these after debugging, of course.)

I finished the Amb task, that was a pain to debug. I hate string processing in Pari. :smile:

[QUOTE=CRGreathouse;239129]

I finished the Amb task, that was a pain to debug. I hate string processing in Pari. :smile:[/QUOTE]

Really? I thought it was only me that hated it. I'm heading to bed I'm up 30 minutes past when I usually go to bed. I've got Pari still open and I'm semi working on a pascals triangle script.

[QUOTE=science_man_88;239130]Really? I thought it was only me that hated it. I'm heading to bed I'm up 30 minutes past when I usually go to bed. I've got Pari still open and I'm semi working on a pascals triangle script.[/QUOTE]

The problem I had was related to the power of concat: I wanted it to join together two vectors and it was obligingly smushing them into strings. I managed to solve my problem, thankfully.

[QUOTE=CRGreathouse;239131]The problem I had was related to the power of concat: I wanted it to join together two vectors and it was obligingly smushing them into strings. I managed to solve my problem, thankfully.[/QUOTE]

the problem for me is I don't use multiple answer vectors:

023
x32
___
0046
+690

not :

23*32 =[6,9,4,6]

[QUOTE=science_man_88;239157]the problem for me is I don't use multiple answer vectors:

023
x32
___
0046
+690

not :

23*32 =[6,9,4,6][/QUOTE]

Ah. You should only use one, but pre-set it to the appropriate size, filled with 0s, then *add* rather than concatenate. That way you can go from

[0, 0, 0, 0, 0]
to
[0, 0, 0, 0, 6]
to
[0, 0, 0, 4, 6]
to
[0, 0, 0, 13, 6]
to
[0, 0, 6, 13, 6]
which can be simplified to
[0, 0, 7, 3, 6]
and then
[7, 3, 6]
if desired.