I have to code a program in pascal that, given the three coefficients of a polynomial(ax²+bx+c), outputs its roots.
Here's what I have right now:
program poly;
type
polynomial = record
a, b, c : real;
end;
procedure readPolynomial (var p : polynomial);
begin
writeln ('Input 1st coefficient: ');
readln (p.a);
writeln ('Input 2nd coefficient: ');
readln (p.b);
writeln ('Input 3rd coefficient: ');
readln (p.c);
end;
function square (x : real) : real;
begin
square := x * x;
end;
procedure roots (p : polynomial; var rP, rN : real);
begin
rP := (-p.b + (sqrt((square(p.b)) - (4 * p.a * p.c)))) / (2 * p.a);
rN := (-p.b - (sqrt((square(p.b)) - (4 * p.a * p.c)))) / (2 * p.a);
writeln('The roots are: ', rP:0:3, ' y ' ,rN:0:3);
end;
var
myPolynomial : polynomial;
r1, r2 : real;
begin
writeln ('Enter the coefficients: ');
readPolynomial (myPolynomial);
roots (myPolynomial, r1, r2);
end.
It works fine for real roots but I don't know how to make it work with complex numbers.
I am assuming your coefficients are real numbers (they user can't enter complex numbers as coefficients). That would add a whole new level of complexity (no pun intended) to the problem.
You need to check the discriminant ((square(p.b)) - (4 * p.a * p.c)) to see if it's less than 0. Currently, your code just does, sqrt((square(p.b)) - (4 * p.a * p.c)) but you aren't checking if you are taking the square root of a negative number (which you can't do using the Pascal sqrt library function).
If the discriminant is negative, then you have a complex root and you can separate the real and imaginary parts as you wish in your program. It's basic quadratic formula.
For example:
procedure roots (p : polynomial; var rP, rN : real);
var disc: real;
begin
disc := square(p.b) - 4*p.a*p.c;
if disc >= 0 then begin
rP := (-p.b + sqrt(disc)) / (2 * p.a);
rN := (-p.b - sqrt(disc)) / (2 * p.a);
writeln('The roots are: ', rP:0:3, ' y ' ,rN:0:3);
end
else begin
// Roots are:
// -p.b/(2*p.a) + (sqrt(-disc)/(2*p.a))i
// -p.b/(2*p.a) - (sqrt(-disc)/(2*p.a))i
end
end;
Here you use the fact that sqrt(x) if x is negative would be, (sqrt(-x))i where i is sqrt(-1). Note that you could also split out the disc = 0 case to avoid repeating a double root.
Since your roots function prints out the results and your main program doesn't use the returned arguments rN and rP, it's not clear to me if you need to pass back the roots at all. But if want to pass the roots back as arguments (the way you have your function currently designed), I'll leave that as an exercise. You just have to decide on a representation for complex roots. One way is to use the Complex number type for the results (if your compiler library supports them), and when the results are real, the imaginary parts will just be zero. Alternatively, if you need to create your own, just make a type which is a record consisting of a real and imaginary part.
type complex = record
re: real;
im: real;
end;
Related
Part of the program I have checks if an input number is a perfect number. We're supposed to find a solution that runs in O(sqrt(n)). The rest of my program runs in constant time, but this function is holding me back.
function Perfect(x: integer): boolean;
var
i: integer;
sum: integer=0;
begin
for i := 1 to x-1 do
if (x mod i = 0) then
sum := sum + i;
if sum = x then
exit(true)
else
exit(false);
end;
This runs in O(n) time, and I need to cut it down to O(sqrt(n)) time.
These are the options I've come up with:
(1) Find a way to make the for loop go from 1 to sqrt(x)...
(2) Find a way to check for a perfect number that doesn't use a for loop...
Any suggestions? I appreciate any hints, tips, instruction, etc. :)
You need to iterate the cycle not for i := 1 to x-1 but for i := 2 to trunc(sqrt(x)).
The highest integer divisor is x but we do not take it in into account when looking for perfect numbers. We increment sum by 1 instead (or initialize it with 1 - not 0).
The code if (x mod i = 0) then sum := sum + i; for this purpose can be converted to:
if (x mod i = 0) then
begin
sum := sum + i;
sum := sum + (x div i);
end;
And so we get the following code:
function Perfect(x: integer): boolean;
var
i: integer;
sum: integer = 1;
sqrtx: integer;
begin
sqrtx := trunc(sqrt(x));
i := 2;
while i <= sqrtx do
begin
if (x mod i = 0) then
begin
sum := sum + i;
sum := sum + (x div i) // you can also compare i and x div i
//to avoid adding the same number twice
//for example when x = 4 both 2 and 4 div 2 will be added
end;
inc(i);
end;
if sum = x then
exit(true)
else
exit(false);
end;
Part of a Pascal ISO 10206 program I am building, requires me to implement a function to exponentiate a real number (x) to Eulers number (e), without using any exponentiation functions already included in Pascal(**,pow,exp...).
I have been trying different algorithms for hours but I cant figure out how to do it without using the already included exponentiation functions.
Any help would be appreciated. Any mathematical algorithm of some sort etc... Thanks in advance.
As others have said, it doesn't make sense not to use Exp() or a function based upon it. But if you really must use something else, and don't want to get too technical/mathematical, then the following should work (the real algorithm is far more complicated and requires much more knowledge of math).
The program uses a combination of the first N terms of Taylor series for the fraction of X and binary exponentiation for the integer part of X. It is probably not very fast, but pretty accurate, even for larger exponents. For comparison, I also display Exp(X). If your Pascal has a Double or Extended type, use those instead of Real.
program SimplePower;
{ Required for Delphi, you can omit it in other Pascals: }
{$APPTYPE CONSOLE}
{ Returns approximate value of e^X using sum of first N terms of Taylor series.
Works fine with X values between 0 and 1.0 and N ~ 30. }
function Exponential(N: Integer; X: Real): Real;
var
I: Integer;
begin
Result := 1.0;
for I := N - 1 downto 1 do
Result := 1.0 + X * Result / I;
end;
{ Binary exponentiation of Base by integer Exponent. }
function IntegerExp(Base: Real; Exponent: Integer): Real;
begin
Result := 1.0;
while Exponent > 0 do
begin
if Odd(Exponent) then
Result := Result * Base;
Base := Base * Base;
Exponent := Exponent shr 1;
end;
end;
{ Combines IntegerExp function for integral part with
Exponential function for fractional part. }
function MyExp(N: Integer; X: Real): Real;
const
E = 2.7182818284590452353602874713527; { from Google: "e euler" }
var
Factor: Real;
Fraction: Real;
begin
Fraction := Exponential(N, Frac(X));
Factor := IntegerExp(E, Trunc(X));
Result := Factor * Fraction;
end;
{ Simple demo: }
const
N = 30;
X = 73.4567890242421234;
begin
Writeln('MyExp(', N, ', ', X:22:18, ') = ', MyExp(N, X):22:18);
Writeln('Exp(', X:22:18, ') = ', Exp(X):22:18);
end.
Ref:
Taylor series for exponentiation
Binary exponentiation
I did not do anything for negative exponents, but just know that Exp(-x) = 1/Exp(x). You could amend MyExpwith that knowledge.
I used the solution pointed out by #RudyVelthuis in some other post, but modified it a bit. It is based upon that x^0.5 = sqrt(x), which we can use to our advantage. Ill leave the Pascal ISO 10206 code I used attached. Thank you all for your help, specially Rudy.
function MyPow(base,power,precision:real):real;
begin
if (power<0) then MyPow:=1/MyPow(base,-power,precision)
else if (power>=10) then MyPow:=sqr(MyPow(base,power/2,precision/2))
else if (power>=1) then MyPow:=base*MyPow(base,power-1,precision)
else if (precision>=1) then MyPow:=sqrt(base)
else MyPow:=sqrt(MyPow(base,power*2,precision*2));
end;
My program should inverse a string (ex. for Hello world returns dlrow olleH) and it works only for strings smaller than 20 characters. For 20 or more i get "Error 202 Stack overflow". Thank you :)
Program Inv;
var S, A: String;
n: integer;
Function I(X: String; z: integer):String;
begin
if z=1 then I:=X[z] else
I:=X[z]+I(X, z-1);
end;
begin
write ('Enter your text: ');
readln (S);
n:=length(S);
A:=I(S, n);
writeln (A);
readln;
end.
Unless you are required to show a recursive solution, you're usually better to sticking with iteration(a). Recursion uses an often-limited resource (the stack) to weave its magic and is often the cause of crashes when you exceed that limit.
Iterative solutions tend to be far less restrictive, such as the code below:
program PaxCode;
Function reverse(inp_str: string) : string;
var out_str : string = '';
var idx : integer = 1;
begin
while (idx <= length(inp_str)) do
begin
out_str := inp_str[idx] + out_str;
idx := idx + 1
end;
reverse := out_str
end;
var test_str: string = 'My hovercraft is full of eels and they will not let me drive it';
begin
writeln(test_str);
writeln(reverse(test_str))
end.
As you can see, the output is correct, and not limited to twenty (or twenty-nine) characters:
My hovercraft is full of eels and they will not let me drive it
ti evird em tel ton lliw yeht dna slee fo lluf si tfarcrevoh yM
(a) The best areas for recursion are those where each level removes a sizable proportion of the solution space. For example, binary searches remove fully 50% of the remaining solution space on every level so you could search through a structure holding four billion entries with just thirty-two levels, since 232 is a touch above 4.2 billion.
Something like reversing a 400-character string will take, ..., let me think, oh yes, 400 levels. That won't necessarily end well :-)
I would like to ask if anybody can give a hand in solving the following issue: How should I use the random function in Pascal in order to generate a random combination of digits that are already initialized (I mean that I have given values to four variables and I want via the random function to create a random combination of these four digits).
Thanks in advance!
Rossi
var digits : array[0..3] of integer = (10,20,30,40);
i : integer;
begin
Randomize; // initialize the random generator. Only once per program
for i:=0 to 50 do
Writeln(digits[random(4)]);
end.
The Writeln line draws a number 0<=x<4 so 0..3, and looks it up in the digits array, then writes it to console output. It is draws 50 random numbers and then quits.
var
randomnumber,i:integer;
number:array[0..3] of integer;
begin
randomize;
for i:= 0 to 3 do
begin
readln(number[i]);
end;
randomnumber:= (number[random(4)] * 1000) + (number[random(4)] * 100) + (number[random(4)] * 10) + (number[random(4)] * 1);
writeln(randomnumber);
end.
I hope this could help.
But the given initial value should be between 0 to 9.
If you want that the output contains each digit only once, then you would need to stored the digits which have already been chosen in a set to prevent them from being chosen again.
const
digits: array [0..3] of integer = (1, 3, 5, 7);
var
i, n, total: integer;
stored: set of integer;
begin
Randomize;
stored:= [];
total:= 0;
for i:= 1 to 4 do
begin
repeat
n:= random (4);
until not (n in stored);
stored:= stored + [n];
total:= total * 10 + digits[n];
end;
writeln (total)
end.
I'm looking for an algorithm to generate permutations of a set in such a way that I could make a lazy list of them in Clojure. i.e. I'd like to iterate over a list of permutations where each permutation is not calculated until I request it, and all of the permutations don't have to be stored in memory at once.
Alternatively I'm looking for an algorithm where given a certain set, it will return the "next" permutation of that set, in such a way that repeatedly calling the function on its own output will cycle through all permutations of the original set, in some order (what the order is doesn't matter).
Is there such an algorithm? Most of the permutation-generating algorithms I've seen tend to generate them all at once (usually recursively), which doesn't scale to very large sets. An implementation in Clojure (or another functional language) would be helpful but I can figure it out from pseudocode.
Yes, there is a "next permutation" algorithm, and it's quite simple too. The C++ standard template library (STL) even has a function called next_permutation.
The algorithm actually finds the next permutation -- the lexicographically next one. The idea is this: suppose you are given a sequence, say "32541". What is the next permutation?
If you think about it, you'll see that it is "34125". And your thoughts were probably something this: In "32541",
there is no way to keep the "32" fixed and find a later permutation in the "541" part, because that permutation is already the last one for 5,4, and 1 -- it is sorted in decreasing order.
So you'll have to change the "2" to something bigger -- in fact, to the smallest number bigger than it in the "541" part, namely 4.
Now, once you've decided that the permutation will start as "34", the rest of the numbers should be in increasing order, so the answer is "34125".
The algorithm is to implement precisely that line of reasoning:
Find the longest "tail" that is ordered in decreasing order. (The "541" part.)
Change the number just before the tail (the "2") to the smallest number bigger than it in the tail (the 4).
Sort the tail in increasing order.
You can do (1.) efficiently by starting at the end and going backwards as long as the previous element is not smaller than the current element. You can do (2.) by just swapping the "4" with the '2", so you'll have "34521". Once you do this, you can avoid using a sorting algorithm for (3.), because the tail was, and is still (think about this), sorted in decreasing order, so it only needs to be reversed.
The C++ code does precisely this (look at the source in /usr/include/c++/4.0.0/bits/stl_algo.h on your system, or see this article); it should be simple to translate it to your language: [Read "BidirectionalIterator" as "pointer", if you're unfamiliar with C++ iterators. The code returns false if there is no next permutation, i.e. we are already in decreasing order.]
template <class BidirectionalIterator>
bool next_permutation(BidirectionalIterator first,
BidirectionalIterator last) {
if (first == last) return false;
BidirectionalIterator i = first;
++i;
if (i == last) return false;
i = last;
--i;
for(;;) {
BidirectionalIterator ii = i--;
if (*i <*ii) {
BidirectionalIterator j = last;
while (!(*i <*--j));
iter_swap(i, j);
reverse(ii, last);
return true;
}
if (i == first) {
reverse(first, last);
return false;
}
}
}
It might seem that it can take O(n) time per permutation, but if you think about it more carefully, you can prove that it takes O(n!) time for all permutations in total, so only O(1) -- constant time -- per permutation.
The good thing is that the algorithm works even when you have a sequence with repeated elements: with, say, "232254421", it would find the tail as "54421", swap the "2" and "4" (so "232454221"), reverse the rest, giving "232412245", which is the next permutation.
Assuming that we're talking about lexicographic order over the values being permuted, there are two general approaches that you can use:
transform one permutation of the elements to the next permutation (as ShreevatsaR posted), or
directly compute the nth permutation, while counting n from 0 upward.
For those (like me ;-) who don't speak c++ as natives, approach 1 can be implemented from the following pseudo-code, assuming zero-based indexing of an array with index zero on the "left" (substituting some other structure, such as a list, is "left as an exercise" ;-):
1. scan the array from right-to-left (indices descending from N-1 to 0)
1.1. if the current element is less than its right-hand neighbor,
call the current element the pivot,
and stop scanning
1.2. if the left end is reached without finding a pivot,
reverse the array and return
(the permutation was the lexicographically last, so its time to start over)
2. scan the array from right-to-left again,
to find the rightmost element larger than the pivot
(call that one the successor)
3. swap the pivot and the successor
4. reverse the portion of the array to the right of where the pivot was found
5. return
Here's an example starting with a current permutation of CADB:
1. scanning from the right finds A as the pivot in position 1
2. scanning again finds B as the successor in position 3
3. swapping pivot and successor gives CBDA
4. reversing everything following position 1 (i.e. positions 2..3) gives CBAD
5. CBAD is the next permutation after CADB
For the second approach (direct computation of the nth permutation), remember that there are N! permutations of N elements. Therefore, if you are permuting N elements, the first (N-1)! permutations must begin with the smallest element, the next (N-1)! permutations must begin with the second smallest, and so on. This leads to the following recursive approach (again in pseudo-code, numbering the permutations and positions from 0):
To find permutation x of array A, where A has N elements:
0. if A has one element, return it
1. set p to ( x / (N-1)! ) mod N
2. the desired permutation will be A[p] followed by
permutation ( x mod (N-1)! )
of the elements remaining in A after position p is removed
So, for example, the 13th permutation of ABCD is found as follows:
perm 13 of ABCD: {p = (13 / 3!) mod 4 = (13 / 6) mod 4 = 2; ABCD[2] = C}
C followed by perm 1 of ABD {because 13 mod 3! = 13 mod 6 = 1}
perm 1 of ABD: {p = (1 / 2!) mod 3 = (1 / 2) mod 2 = 0; ABD[0] = A}
A followed by perm 1 of BD {because 1 mod 2! = 1 mod 2 = 1}
perm 1 of BD: {p = (1 / 1!) mod 2 = (1 / 1) mod 2 = 1; BD[1] = D}
D followed by perm 0 of B {because 1 mod 1! = 1 mod 1 = 0}
B (because there's only one element)
DB
ADB
CADB
Incidentally, the "removal" of elements can be represented by a parallel array of booleans which indicates which elements are still available, so it is not necessary to create a new array on each recursive call.
So, to iterate across the permutations of ABCD, just count from 0 to 23 (4!-1) and directly compute the corresponding permutation.
You should check the Permutations article on wikipeda. Also, there is the concept of Factoradic numbers.
Anyway, the mathematical problem is quite hard.
In C# you can use an iterator, and stop the permutation algorithm using yield. The problem with this is that you cannot go back and forth, or use an index.
More examples of permutation algorithms to generate them.
Source: http://www.ddj.com/architect/201200326
Uses the Fike's Algorithm, that is the one of fastest known.
Uses the Algo to the Lexographic order.
Uses the nonlexographic, but runs faster than item 2.
1.
PROGRAM TestFikePerm;
CONST marksize = 5;
VAR
marks : ARRAY [1..marksize] OF INTEGER;
ii : INTEGER;
permcount : INTEGER;
PROCEDURE WriteArray;
VAR i : INTEGER;
BEGIN
FOR i := 1 TO marksize
DO Write ;
WriteLn;
permcount := permcount + 1;
END;
PROCEDURE FikePerm ;
{Outputs permutations in nonlexicographic order. This is Fike.s algorithm}
{ with tuning by J.S. Rohl. The array marks[1..marksizn] is global. The }
{ procedure WriteArray is global and displays the results. This must be}
{ evoked with FikePerm(2) in the calling procedure.}
VAR
dn, dk, temp : INTEGER;
BEGIN
IF
THEN BEGIN { swap the pair }
WriteArray;
temp :=marks[marksize];
FOR dn := DOWNTO 1
DO BEGIN
marks[marksize] := marks[dn];
marks [dn] := temp;
WriteArray;
marks[dn] := marks[marksize]
END;
marks[marksize] := temp;
END {of bottom level sequence }
ELSE BEGIN
FikePerm;
temp := marks[k];
FOR dk := DOWNTO 1
DO BEGIN
marks[k] := marks[dk];
marks[dk][ := temp;
FikePerm;
marks[dk] := marks[k];
END; { of loop on dk }
marks[k] := temp;l
END { of sequence for other levels }
END; { of FikePerm procedure }
BEGIN { Main }
FOR ii := 1 TO marksize
DO marks[ii] := ii;
permcount := 0;
WriteLn ;
WrieLn;
FikePerm ; { It always starts with 2 }
WriteLn ;
ReadLn;
END.
2.
PROGRAM TestLexPerms;
CONST marksize = 5;
VAR
marks : ARRAY [1..marksize] OF INTEGER;
ii : INTEGER;
permcount : INTEGER;
PROCEDURE WriteArray;
VAR i : INTEGER;
BEGIN
FOR i := 1 TO marksize
DO Write ;
permcount := permcount + 1;
WriteLn;
END;
PROCEDURE LexPerm ;
{ Outputs permutations in lexicographic order. The array marks is global }
{ and has n or fewer marks. The procedure WriteArray () is global and }
{ displays the results. }
VAR
work : INTEGER:
mp, hlen, i : INTEGER;
BEGIN
IF
THEN BEGIN { Swap the pair }
work := marks[1];
marks[1] := marks[2];
marks[2] := work;
WriteArray ;
END
ELSE BEGIN
FOR mp := DOWNTO 1
DO BEGIN
LexPerm<>;
hlen := DIV 2;
FOR i := 1 TO hlen
DO BEGIN { Another swap }
work := marks[i];
marks[i] := marks[n - i];
marks[n - i] := work
END;
work := marks[n]; { More swapping }
marks[n[ := marks[mp];
marks[mp] := work;
WriteArray;
END;
LexPerm<>
END;
END;
BEGIN { Main }
FOR ii := 1 TO marksize
DO marks[ii] := ii;
permcount := 1; { The starting position is permutation }
WriteLn < Starting position: >;
WriteLn
LexPerm ;
WriteLn < PermCount is , permcount>;
ReadLn;
END.
3.
PROGRAM TestAllPerms;
CONST marksize = 5;
VAR
marks : ARRAY [1..marksize] of INTEGER;
ii : INTEGER;
permcount : INTEGER;
PROCEDURE WriteArray;
VAR i : INTEGER;
BEGIN
FOR i := 1 TO marksize
DO Write ;
WriteLn;
permcount := permcount + 1;
END;
PROCEDURE AllPerm (n : INTEGER);
{ Outputs permutations in nonlexicographic order. The array marks is }
{ global and has n or few marks. The procedure WriteArray is global and }
{ displays the results. }
VAR
work : INTEGER;
mp, swaptemp : INTEGER;
BEGIN
IF
THEN BEGIN { Swap the pair }
work := marks[1];
marks[1] := marks[2];
marks[2] := work;
WriteArray;
END
ELSE BEGIN
FOR mp := DOWNTO 1
DO BEGIN
ALLPerm<< n - 1>>;
IF >
THEN swaptemp := 1
ELSE swaptemp := mp;
work := marks[n];
marks[n] := marks[swaptemp};
marks[swaptemp} := work;
WriteArray;
AllPerm< n-1 >;
END;
END;
BEGIN { Main }
FOR ii := 1 TO marksize
DO marks[ii] := ii
permcount :=1;
WriteLn < Starting position; >;
WriteLn;
Allperm < marksize>;
WriteLn < Perm count is , permcount>;
ReadLn;
END.
the permutations function in clojure.contrib.lazy_seqs already claims to do just this.
It looks necromantic in 2022 but I'm sharing it anyway
Here an implementation of C++ next_permutation in Java can be found. The idea of using it in Clojure might be something like
(println (lazy-seq (iterator-seq (NextPermutationIterator. (list 'a 'b 'c)))))
disclaimer: I'm the author and maintainer of the project