pull down to refresh

0 sats \ 1 reply \ @Scroogey 1 Jan \ parent \ on: [Not-so-daily puzzle] happy.newyear science
I got strange results with Python's built-in floats, as if the precision wasn't good enough.
Here's my sloppy code.
Closest match so far:
u=97366344686.000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000
z=305885393174.00000000000140601378546118371359432952443993406280164926158704474801197648048400878906250000000000000000000000000000
r=305885393174.00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000
y=29052179.885292215619356553510385828347735846057466489994871801023624482995165949265643254134563120164232130092252951481137523825
haosz.vvc6yx5pfugb5u1knqd1
write
preview
1 sat \ 0 replies \ @south_korea_ln OP 1 Jan
I got strange results with Python's built-in floats, as if the precision wasn't good enough.
Oh that's a good point. Will test using mpmath.tan(n) instead of math.tan(n) and setting the number of decimals using mpmath.mp.dps = 100.
Tnx for your code.
From my end, I could probably speed up things by switching to Fortran, but I guess I'll be content for now knowing there is a likely way and a likely solution. Learned a few things in the process :)
reply