|
Well, I mean, it might be relays or something else other than transistors, but essentially correct.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks
Use “APM” in the Lounge search box to find my APM related AI post
|
|
|
|
|
You are welcome.
"In testa che avete, Signor di Ceprano?"
-- Rigoletto
|
|
|
|
|
|
Message Removed
modified 21-Jun-23 5:19am.
|
|
|
|
|
Message Removed
modified 21-Jun-23 5:19am.
|
|
|
|
|
(20*23) + (25*28) + (30*33) + (35*38) +...........+ (m*(m-3)) what is the c programmimg code of the summetion of this series
|
|
|
|
|
What have you tried? Can you write the code for evaluating a single term?
"the debugger doesn't tell me anything because this code compiles just fine" - random QA comment
"Facebook is where you tell lies to your friends. Twitter is where you tell the truth to strangers." - chriselst
"I don't drink any more... then again, I don't drink any less." - Mike Mullikins uncle
|
|
|
|
|
You can see the sequence, which uses m*(m+3) not minus:
1. Set m = 20
2. Multiply m by (m + 3)
3. Add the result to the running total
4. Add 5 to m
5. Goto 2.
|
|
|
|
|
M=23 uses (m*(m-3)) or ((m-3)*m)
"Before entering on an understanding, I have meditated for a long time, and have foreseen what might happen. It is not genius which reveals to me suddenly, secretly, what I have to say or to do in a circumstance unexpected by other people; it is reflection, it is meditation." - Napoleon I
|
|
|
|
|
If m is the first operand, as in (20 * 23) then the formula is m*(m+3). Why would you read it the other way round, or am I missing something mathematical?
|
|
|
|
|
You substituted (M*(M+3)) for (M*(m-3)).
I'm simply reading what the OP "posted".
I'm the one that's missing something regarding you changing it.
"Before entering on an understanding, I have meditated for a long time, and have foreseen what might happen. It is not genius which reveals to me suddenly, secretly, what I have to say or to do in a circumstance unexpected by other people; it is reflection, it is meditation." - Napoleon I
|
|
|
|
|
I did not substitute, I corrected. It's pretty obvious that the questioner made a mistake and typed the wrong sign.
|
|
|
|
|
|
That is just a copy of the original question. What is your point?
|
|
|
|
|
|
My presumption would be that OP did not transcribe it correctly.
The sequence as suggested by the dots, rather than the explicit terms, is not defined as it is posted. But is defined with the suggested correction.
|
|
|
|
|
Looks like homework for recursion. So look up recursion examples and then modify those.
|
|
|
|
|
And then we'll see the post which says, "my program fails with stack overflow" ...
|
|
|
|
|
Well presumably the teacher will provide inputs that do not lead to that.
|
|
|
|
|
Never presume. 
|
|
|
|
|
I would however presume that if the teacher is teaching recursion and then assigns the above problem then the teacher is going to expect a code that does recursion. Whether it causes a stack overflow is outside the bounds of what the teacher is teaching. Although perhaps a teacher that is clever (or trying to be clever) might even provide inputs that would cause an overflow just so the students would need to fumble about with that.
|
|
|
|
|
If what you say is true, then the student would most likely have been able to figure the answer for him/her self.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
