zlacker

[return to "The largest number representable in 64 bits"]
1. tromp+oz[view] [source] 2026-02-02 21:14:38
>>tromp+(OP)
Please no more comments to the extent of "i can define a much larger number in only 1 bit". What makes my blog post (hopefully) interesting is that I consider tiny programs for computing huge numbers in non-cheating languages, that are not specifically equipped for doing so.
◧◩
2. omoika+dQ1[view] [source] 2026-02-03 04:31:19
>>tromp+oz
A better title might have been "fastest growing function with 64bit arguments". The main value of this article is really the various functions that take larger strides to cover a finite range that's significantly larger than 2^64-1.
◧◩◪
3. tromp+Ka2[view] [source] 2026-02-03 07:41:28
>>omoika+dQ1
If it were about coding fast growing functions, then it would have had to mention the incredible 47-bit lambda calculus term λn. n n (λe λx. x e x) (λm. m (λe. m e m)) that achieves f_ε₀ growth. But it expects its argument to be a so-called state numeral n, rather than a Church numeral, and even state numeral 2, which is \e\f\x.f e (\e.f e x) is already 32 bits long, making the application take 2+47+32=81 bits, more than the required 64.
[go to top]