From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: fac41,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gidfac41,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: 109fba,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gid109fba,public X-Google-Thread: 114809,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gid114809,public X-Google-Thread: 1108a1,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gid1108a1,public From: bobduff@world.std.com (Robert A Duff) Subject: Re: OO, C++, and something much better! Date: 1997/01/29 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 213072474 references: <32E6797A.6E21@parcplace.com> organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA newsgroups: comp.lang.eiffel,comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.smalltalk,comp.object Date: 1997-01-29T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: In article , Robert Dewar wrote: >Robert said > >"It is the hallmark of large factorials, that they terminate with lots of zeros. >More interesting yet is that regardless of what radix you convert the factorial >to, providing the radix is not much larger than the factorialized number, >the factorial >will *still* terminate in a lot of zeroes." > >I don't see how you find that interesting, it is transparently obvious that >this is the case if you think about it for a moment ... Yeah, but Mr. Martin injected the only verifiable FACT into this thread so far, which I think was his point! - Bob