Velocity Reviews > Ruby > Modulo ?

# Modulo ?

Zayd Connor
Guest
Posts: n/a

 03-19-2009
Maybe i need to get some sleep, but can someone explain how modulos
work?

Thanks
--
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

7stud --
Guest
Posts: n/a

 03-19-2009
Zayd Connor wrote:
> Maybe i need to get some sleep, but can someone explain how modulos
> work?
>
> Thanks

result = 7 % 3
puts result

--output:--
1

7 has two 3's in it, and after removing those two 3's from 7, the
remainder is 1.

--
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

Guest
Posts: n/a

 03-19-2009
Zayd Connor <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:

> Maybe i need to get some sleep, but can someone explain how modulos
> work?

From "Discrete Mathematics by Rosen":

"Let a be an integer and m be a positive integer. We denote by a mod m
the remainder when a is divided by m.

It follows from the definition of remainder that a mod m is the
integer r such that:

a = q * m + r and 0 <= r < m "

This is all assuming you didn't type an 'o' when you meant 'e'

--
http://lojic.com/

Robert Klemme
Guest
Posts: n/a

 03-19-2009
On 19.03.2009 06:50, Zayd Connor wrote:
> Maybe i need to get some sleep, but can someone explain how modulos
> work?

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=modulo

Rob Biedenharn
Guest
Posts: n/a

 03-19-2009
On Mar 19, 2009, at 10:22 AM, Robert Klemme wrote:

> On 19.03.2009 06:50, Zayd Connor wrote:
>> Maybe i need to get some sleep, but can someone explain how modulos
>> work?

>
> http://lmgtfy.com/?q=modulo
>

This seems completely unnecessary. There was already a great response
from Brian who not only directly addressed the "modulos", but also
picked up and pointed out (subtly) that the question might have been
about "modules". Something that makes perfect sense, but I certainly
didn't see that possibility.

And did you Google modulo or module yourself to see how useful the
result really is? If you're going to simply shout lmgtfy, at least put
"ruby" in there, too (well, for module, not for modulo

-Rob

Rob Biedenharn http://agileconsultingllc.com
http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/(E-Mail Removed)

Robert Klemme
Guest
Posts: n/a

 03-19-2009
On 19.03.2009 15:40, Rob Biedenharn wrote:
> And did you Google modulo or module yourself to see how useful the
> result really is?

I did.

robert

Zayd Connor
Guest
Posts: n/a

 03-19-2009
Rob Biedenharn wrote:
> On Mar 19, 2009, at 10:22 AM, Robert Klemme wrote:
>
>> On 19.03.2009 06:50, Zayd Connor wrote:
>>> Maybe i need to get some sleep, but can someone explain how modulos
>>> work?

>>
>> http://lmgtfy.com/?q=modulo
>>

>
>
> This seems completely unnecessary. There was already a great response
> from Brian who not only directly addressed the "modulos", but also
> picked up and pointed out (subtly) that the question might have been
> about "modules". Something that makes perfect sense, but I certainly
> didn't see that possibility.
>
> And did you Google modulo or module yourself to see how useful the
> result really is? If you're going to simply shout lmgtfy, at least put
> "ruby" in there, too (well, for module, not for modulo
>
> -Rob
>
> Rob Biedenharn http://agileconsultingllc.com
> (E-Mail Removed)

Thanks guys,(singing) I can see clearly now the rain is gone . Maybe I
should have been more clear and added the % sign when mentioning modulo,
so I wouldn't confuse anyone thinking I meant modules

Thanks

--
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

Michael Malone
Guest
Posts: n/a

 03-19-2009

> Thanks guys,(singing) I can see clearly now the rain is gone . Maybe I
> should have been more clear and added the % sign when mentioning modulo,
> so I wouldn't confuse anyone thinking I meant modules
>
> Thanks
>
>

Though there is one thing I would like to point out: 0 % 7 = 0
So 'remainder' is not strictly true

Michael

================================================== =====================
This email, including any attachments, is only for the intended
the subject of legal or other privilege, none of which is waived or
lost by reason of this transmission.
apologies, notify us by return, delete all copies and perform no
other act on the email.
Unfortunately, we cannot warrant that the email has not been
altered or corrupted during transmission.
================================================== =====================

Sebastian Hungerecker
Guest
Posts: n/a

 03-19-2009
Michael Malone wrote:
> Though there is one thing I would like to point out: 0 % 7 = 0
> So 'remainder' is not strictly true

Sorry I don't follow you. What's the remainder of 0/7 if not 0?
0-7*0 is 0, is it not?

Confused,
Sebastian

Michael Malone
Guest
Posts: n/a

 03-19-2009
Sebastian Hungerecker wrote:
> Michael Malone wrote:
>
>> Though there is one thing I would like to point out: 0 % 7 = 0
>> So 'remainder' is not strictly true
>>

>
> Sorry I don't follow you. What's the remainder of 0/7 if not 0?
> 0-7*0 is 0, is it not?
>
> Confused,
> Sebastian
>
>

Many people I know and work with simplify the modulo operator to
themselves as remainder, so mentally (whether or not it is correct)
assume 0/7 = 0 r 7
I am just making an explicit example of this not necessarily obvious
case. It's totally fine when one knows the semantics of modulo, it's
the simplification to remainder that many people make that causes
problems here.

Michael

================================================== =====================
This email, including any attachments, is only for the intended
the subject of legal or other privilege, none of which is waived or
lost by reason of this transmission.
apologies, notify us by return, delete all copies and perform no
other act on the email.
Unfortunately, we cannot warrant that the email has not been
altered or corrupted during transmission.
================================================== =====================