Hi!

nicolas cellier <ncellier at ifrance.com> wrote:
> Just tried this very simple one:
> (I guess the smaller the merrier)
> 
> floorLog10bert
>      "from Bert Freundenberg's idea"
> 
>      (self negative or: [self isZero])
>          ifTrue:
>              [^self error: 'Can''t take log of number <= 0'].
> 	self < 10 ifTrue: [^0].
> 	self < 100 ifTrue: [^1].
> 	self < 1000 ifTrue: [^2].
> 	self < 10000 ifTrue: [^3].
> 	self < 100000 ifTrue: [^4].
> 	self < 1000000 ifTrue: [^5].
> 	self < 10000000 ifTrue: [^6].
> 	self < 100000000 ifTrue: [^7].
> 	self < 1000000000 ifTrue: [^8].
> 	^9 "Based on the fact that (SmallInteger maxVal log: 10) floor = 9"
> 	
> 
> Comparing universal Integer version provided in previous mail and Bert's 
> gives a factor 5 at least

I also noted this and I also used the above approach - though with a
binary search. My code is in the mantis issue I posted in the beginning.
:)

Anyway, since smaller numbers are likely to be much more common I would
guess the ordering above is actually "smarter". And yes, it was fun to
see that Strongtalk does the above and its SmallInteger>>printString is
very similar to the one I ended up writing in the mantis issue.

regards, Göran