You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
On Thu, 14 Dec 2023, 21:47 Kenny Chow, ***@***.***> wrote:
Simply adjusting/scaleing the tolerance with x will do, instead of
complicating the logic with the current solution.
Consider:
function is_good_enough(guess, x) {
return abs(square(guess) - x) < x * 0.001;
}
Instead of:
const error_threshold = 0.01;
function is_good_enough(guess, x) {
return relative_error(guess, improve(guess, x))
< error_threshold;
}
function relative_error(estimate, reference) {
return abs(estimate - reference) / reference;
}
Defining the error_threshold outside is a good practice.
So maybe also consider:
const error_threshold = 0.001;
function is_good_enough(guess, x) {
return abs(square(guess) - x) < x * error_threshold;
}
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#958>, or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AHGSDYDS6ZLOVVD32GQF73DYJMGQRAVCNFSM6AAAAABAU7AFPCVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43ASLTON2WKOZSGA2DCOBVGQ4TCMQ>
.
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.Message
ID: ***@***.***>
Simply adjusting/scaling the tolerance with x will do, instead of complicating the logic with the current solution.
Consider:
Instead of:
Defining the error_threshold outside is a good practice.
So maybe also consider:
Relatively minor: keeping the original threshold = 0.001 instead of changing it to 0.01.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: