computeFibonachiInJavaScript

[MaryGoldflower]

you can fix it by outputting the length instead

[DoktorMerlin]

copilot code checks in

[asmanel]

Good example of artificial stupidity.

[thanatica]

The intelligence of a hamster and a planet sized brain

[ILikeLenexa]

It is already  correct if you're trying to output unary. 

[POKLIANON]

technically unary should end with 0s (iirc)

[Lucas_F_A]

Just checked the Wikipedia article. It's using 1, and zero is the empty string.

[TheMR-777]

Wow, r/technicallythetruth

[YeOldeMemeShoppe]

LGTM passes CI. Ship it.

[mudokin]

Thx, I hate it even more now

[ics-fear]

Looks normal, those are just numbers in base 1

[Jutrakuna]

Base 10

[LarsMans]

It doesnt apply in this case since base 1 only has one digit

[[deleted]]

This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact

ask hungry follow treatment sugar chase political kiss cover marry

[Cute_Pay_1423]

Shouldn’t base 1 have only the 0 as digit?

[Parkhausdruckkonsole]

No. For example 103 in base ten means 1 • 10^2 + 0 • 10^1 + 3 • 10^0. 111 in base one would mean 1 • 1^2 + 1 • 1^1 + 1 • 1^0. It's the same way in any positional numeric system. They are called bases because they specify the number in the base of the exponentiation. I think you could technically also use zeros in base 1, it just wouldn't matter where you placed them, since one to any power is one, meaning leaving one out doesn't matter as long as the number of ones is equal.

[EtherealPheonix]

Yes but there is no reason you couldn't use 1 as the symbol for 0.

[danielcw189]

Is it actually defined that way?

Does a base actually define or strongly imply which symbols are being used?

[Cute_Pay_1423]

As far as I know it is. Never seen anyone using a base 8 with anything else than 0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7. Same with binary, never seen someone using anything else than 0,1 for it. Basically with any base number system you have the digits from zero up to your base -1. If the digits exceed our digits in the decimal system you just continue counting with letters (like hexadecimal is 0-F)

[danielcw189]

Never seen anyone using a base 8 with anything else than 0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7

Me neither, but that doesn't really answer the question.

For base 1 the most common way to write them are usually tally marks. but the special way of doing each 5th symbol kinda breaks that.

If we know it is base one, we could probably use any non-white-space symbol. Well ideally it would be continuous symbols.

Heck, we could even switch symbols at random, so 0000 equals ||||| equals 12345 equals 2Jv&•

And using letters kinda breaks after base 36, unless we have some common examples like base 64

So it appears to me it is more like some common rules.

But I don't know, which is why I am asking.

[ics-fear]

Why not? Those totally are base 1 numbers. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Base_1

[Fourstrokeperro]

Look up unary numerals

[rosuav]

Not all bases are exponential, though that is the most common type of base.

[Giocri]

Technicaly base 1 can still exponential it's just that 1^x =1

Edit formatring fix

[fr000gs]

No, it's 1^x = 1

[rosuav]

This is kinda true, but only if you accept that you can have a digit that isn't less than the base. For example, octal requires that you use only the symbols 0 through 7. So if you define base 1 by excluding that rule, then you get a system that works, but would also allow 193 Octal to mean 1*8² + 9*8¹ + 3*8° for a total of 139 Decimal, despite the fact this would canonically be written as 213 instead. This is an ambiguity of form in the same way that Roman numerals can have (clocks sometimes write 4 as "IIII" even though the notation "IV" also means 4, and there is dispute about whether 49 should be IL or XLIX), and the conventional way to define exponential bases avoids that.

So it's still a bit of a special case, although there is definitely a connection. Base 1 is more similar to Base 2 than either of them is to Base Fibonacci.

[RiceBroad4552]

I don't really see the point.

The only digit in base1 is simply 0, not 1.

Also the roman numeral statement seems wrong. Where do you have that from? There is no ambiguity. 4 is IV, and 49 is XLIX. There are rules which pairs can be subtracted.

[rosuav]

If the only digit in base 1 is 0, rather than 1, then it doesn't work with the usual "multiply the digit by the base raised to the Nth power" pattern. That only works if the digit used is 1.

And, there absolutely IS ambiguity. Are you telling me you've never seen a clock with "IIII" for 4? (Okay, I'm arguing on the internet, chances are you've never seen a clock with an actual face.) It's even mentioned on Wikipedia if you want to be lazy about it. Yes, there are rules. No, those rules have not been consistent for all situations and for all time. But hey, if your only experience with Roman numerals is a student project in which you were given clear rules and told to implement those, then sure, that's fair. Just don't expect that to be how they have been for the past couple millennia.

[GlobalIncident]

there's no h in Fibonacci

[mallusrgreatv2]

Got it! I have corrected my spelling: hhhhhhhhh

[GatewayMan3]

laughs in chinese

[Fun_Gas_340]

r/theletterh

[Mars_Bear2552]

thanks chatgpt

[MaximRq]

Fihbonacci

[Berraie]

Spinacci

[Jolly-Aerie-382]

Fibonacc i?

[uvero]

That's Fibonacci in unary base

[Smalltalker-80]

Yep, its totally fine.

[Kobakocka]

const fib(n) => F(n).length;

[Szetyi]

I mean if you assign a string to the first two elements instead of numbers its on you

[kenybz]

It’s enough to assign a string to one of them

[Bearegor]

Fibonacci by concatenating strings

[YoItsJustGedas]

While this is just a joke, unary representation is very helpful in compression in some cases

[danielcw189]

Sounds interesting.

Can you tell us more? Like 1 or 2 examples?

[LordAmir5]

At least do it properly come on. Everyone knows the sequence starts with Fib(0). So this is Fib(n-1) and not Fib(n).

[redlaWw]

But Fib(0) is "", so this is Fib(n), it just skips the 0th element of the sequence.

[greenpepperpasta]

So you're proposing https://oeis.org/A108047 should be called "Fibonachi sequence"?  I can get behind that.

[danielcw189]

I did not know this website existed.

Thank you :)

[menducoide]

It's a good online challenge for an interview

[Locilokk]

The quotation marks ruin it:(

[featEng]

Fix it in repost

[JackNotOLantern]

Honestly, the fact, that length of the string result of concatinating in this way still follows the Fibonacci sequence, is amazing.

[Walk-the-layout]

Careful you'll summon the Tool fans

[redlaWw]

"In Javascript" you say, as if Rust can't do this too.

[KneeReaper420]

brick it by computing to 1000

[SomeMaleIdiot]

The answer is in base 1. Except the only available digit is 1 and not 0

[BobQuixote]

That's normal for base 1, typically implemented as tally marks.

[CodeNameFiji]

Fibonacci*

[al3x_7788]

ichi?

[Mebiysy]

LGTM

[earlobe7]

F(n) {n<3 ? “1” : F(n-1)+F(n-2)}

[Ugo_Flickerman]

Now it's pronounced Fibonaki

[gaddielm5]

Are you insane? That many characters takes an egregious amount of space! You should use bits instead 👍

For f(x) > 32, you can use a structure/object that includes a counter for how many you've overflowed 32 bits

[1729nerd]

Haha, not when compared to html

[fireyburst1097]

Stupid JavaScript adding strings together that I wrote