Need to check if number of digits of an integer is even with recursion.
Here is without recursion:
private static boolean jeParanBrCifara(int n) {
int brojCifara = String.valueOf(n).length();
if (brojCifara % 2 == 0)
return true;
else
return false;
}
and here is code for counting numbers with the recursion
public int DigitsCount(int Number) {
if (Number > 0) {
Count = Count + 1;
DigitsCount(Number / 10);
}
return Count;
}
But how to make an recursive method that will take an integer as parameter and return true (if number of digits is even) of false ?
I did this, but not sure if it is correct:
static int Count = 0;
public static boolean isEven(int Number) {
boolean even = false;
if (Number > 0) {
Count = Count + 1;
isEven(Number / 10);
}
if (Count % 2 == 0) {
even = true;
}
return even;
}
Any tips/hints?
Consider how the answer changes as you increase the number of digits:
1 digit - false
2 digits - true
3 digit - false
4 digits - true
and so on
See the pattern? The answer to a problem with one digit is false, and the answer to a problem with n+1 digits is the inverse of the answer for the problem with n digits.
Since you already know that reducing the number of digits by one is done by dividing by 10 in integers, you should be able to write a solution to the above algorithm with just a few lines of code.
Recursion is to express the function in terms of itself, but for a smaller problem. Something like this:
If the number is 9 or lower, it's false.
If the number is 99 or lower, it's true.
Otherwise, divide by 100 and check if the result has an even number of digits...
Since we know that Number%2 will return 0 or 1, i'm going to assume that you shouldn't be using that to determinate if the number is even or odd.
You should set your base case (If 1 then return false)
Then check if the n-1 was even or odd and return the opposite.
Let's assume we're only dealing with positive numbers, something like this could be written:
public static boolean IsEven(int n)
{
return n >= 10
? !IsEven(n / 10)
: false;
}
On the same line as mentioned by dasblinkenlight above
public static boolean isEven(int num){
if(num>=10){
return !isEven(num/10);
}
return false;
}
public static boolean sameNumbers(int number) {
boolean isSame;
isSame = (number % 10) == (number / 10) % 10;
sameNumbers(number / 10);
return isSame;
}
My task is to implement a method which checks if the given int value has all the same numbers (e.g. 666 or 1111). However, the requirement is that I should just choose recursion and no iteration.
I am aware that my method wouldn't work, but I really don't know how I can solve this problem without any if statements. Any ideas?
You have the right approach. It's just a matter of combining the base case with the recursive component. If you want to avoid if, just do this:
public static boolean sameNumbers(int number) {
return number < 10 || ((number % 10) == (number / 10) % 10)
&& sameNumbers(number / 10));
}
When tackling a recursion problem, you have to split it into a base case and a recurse case. So for instance, you know that any number with one digit contains all the same digit. That would be your base case.
For numbers with more than one digit, you could check two digits, and fail fast if they don't match. If they do match, then chop one off and return the test against the shortened number.
For a more spelled out implementation:
public static bool sameNumbers(int number) {
int onesPlace = number % 10;
int shifted = number / 10;
int tensPlace = shifted % 10;
return onesPlace == number || (onesPlace == tensPlace && sameNumbers(shifted));
}
Depending on your definition of correct, this will handle negative numbers correctly.
If you are allowed to use if statements, this will save you a few instructions:
public static bool sameNumbers(int number) {
int onesPlace = number % 10;
if (onesPlace == number) {
return true;
}
int shifted = number / 10;
int tensPlace = shifted % 10;
return onesPlace == tensPlace && sameNumbers(shifted);
}
I am working on a prime factorization program implemented in Java.
The goal is to find the largest prime factor of 600851475143 (Project Euler problem 3).
I think I have most of it done, but I am getting a few errors.
Also my logic seems to be off, in particular the method that I have set up for checking to see if a number is prime.
public class PrimeFactor {
public static void main(String[] args) {
int count = 0;
for (int i = 0; i < Math.sqrt(600851475143L); i++) {
if (Prime(i) && i % Math.sqrt(600851475143L) == 0) {
count = i;
System.out.println(count);
}
}
}
public static boolean Prime(int n) {
boolean isPrime = false;
// A number is prime iff it is divisible by 1 and itself only
if (n % n == 0 && n % 1 == 0) {
isPrime = true;
}
return isPrime;
}
}
Edit
public class PrimeFactor {
public static void main(String[] args) {
for (int i = 2; i <= 600851475143L; i++) {
if (isPrime(i) == true) {
System.out.println(i);
}
}
}
public static boolean isPrime(int number) {
if (number == 1) return false;
if (number == 2) return true;
if (number % 2 == 0) return false;
for (int i = 3; i <= number; i++) {
if (number % i == 0) return false;
}
return true;
}
}
Why make it so complicated? You don't need do anything like isPrime(). Divide it's least divisor(prime) and do the loop from this prime. Here is my simple code :
public class PrimeFactor {
public static int largestPrimeFactor(long number) {
int i;
for (i = 2; i <= number; i++) {
if (number % i == 0) {
number /= i;
i--;
}
}
return i;
}
/**
* #param args
*/
public static void main(String[] args) {
System.out.println(largestPrimeFactor(13195));
System.out.println(largestPrimeFactor(600851475143L));
}
}
edit: I hope this doesn't sound incredibly condescending as an answer. I just really wanted to illustrate that from the computer's point of view, you have to check all possible numbers that could be factors of X to make sure it's prime. Computers don't know that it's composite just by looking at it, so you have to iterate
Example: Is X a prime number?
For the case where X = 67:
How do you check this?
I divide it by 2... it has a remainder of 1 (this also tells us that 67 is an odd number)
I divide it by 3... it has a remainder of 1
I divide it by 4... it has a remainder of 3
I divide it by 5... it has a remainder of 2
I divide it by 6... it has a remainder of 1
In fact, you will only get a remainder of 0 if the number is not prime.
Do you have to check every single number less than X to make sure it's prime? Nope. Not anymore, thanks to math (!)
Let's look at a smaller number, like 16.
16 is not prime.
why? because
2*8 = 16
4*4 = 16
So 16 is divisible evenly by more than just 1 and itself. (Although "1" is technically not a prime number, but that's technicalities, and I digress)
So we divide 16 by 1... of course this works, this works for every number
Divide 16 by 2... we get a remainder of 0 (8*2)
Divide 16 by 3... we get a remainder of 1
Divide 16 by 4... we get a remainder of 0 (4*4)
Divide 16 by 5... we get a remainder of 1
Divide 16 by 6... we get a remainder of 4
Divide 16 by 7... we get a remainder of 2
Divide 16 by 8... we get a remainder of 0 (8*2)
We really only need one remainder of 0 to tell us it's composite (the opposite of "prime" is "composite").
Checking if 16 is divisible by 2 is the same thing as checking if it's divisible by 8, because 2 and 8 multiply to give you 16.
We only need to check a portion of the spectrum (from 2 up to the square-root of X) because the largest number that we can multiply is sqrt(X), otherwise we are using the smaller numbers to get redundant answers.
Is 17 prime?
17 % 2 = 1
17 % 3 = 2
17 % 4 = 1 <--| approximately the square root of 17 [4.123...]
17 % 5 = 2 <--|
17 % 6 = 5
17 % 7 = 3
The results after sqrt(X), like 17 % 7 and so on, are redundant because they must necessarily multiply with something smaller than the sqrt(X) to yield X.
That is,
A * B = X
if A and B are both greater than sqrt(X) then
A*B will yield a number that is greater than X.
Thus, one of either A or B must be smaller than sqrt(X), and it is redundant to check both of these values since you only need to know if one of them divides X evenly (the even division gives you the other value as an answer)
I hope that helps.
edit: There are more sophisticated methods of checking primality and Java has a built-in "this number is probably prime" or "this number is definitely composite" method in the BigInteger class as I recently learned via another SO answer :]
You need to do some research on algorithms for factorizing large numbers; this wikipedia page looks like a good place to start. In the first paragraph, it states:
When the numbers are very large, no efficient integer factorization algorithm is publicly known ...
but it does list a number of special and general purpose algorithms. You need to pick one that will work well enough to deal with 12 decimal digit numbers. These numbers are too large for the most naive approach to work, but small enough that (for example) an approach based on enumerating the prime numbers starting from 2 would work. (Hint - start with the Sieve of Erasthones)
Here is very elegant answer - which uses brute force (not some fancy algorithm) but in a smart way - by lowering the limit as we find primes and devide composite by those primes...
It also prints only the primes - and just the primes, and if one prime is more then once in the product - it will print it as many times as that prime is in the product.
public class Factorization {
public static void main(String[] args) {
long composite = 600851475143L;
int limit = (int)Math.sqrt(composite)+1;
for (int i=3; i<limit; i+=2)
{
if (composite%i==0)
{
System.out.println(i);
composite = composite/i;
limit = (int)Math.sqrt(composite)+1;
i-=2; //this is so it could check same prime again
}
}
System.out.println(composite);
}
}
You want to iterate from 2 -> n-1 and make sure that n % i != 0. That's the most naive way to check for primality. As explained above, this is very very slow if the number is large.
To find factors, you want something like:
long limit = sqrt(number);
for (long i=3; i<limit; i+=2)
if (number % i == 0)
print "factor = " , i;
In this case, the factors are all small enough (<7000) that finding them should take well under a second, even with naive code like this. Also note that this particular number has other, smaller, prime factors. For a brute force search like this, you can save a little work by dividing out the smaller factors as you find them, and then do a prime factorization of the smaller number that results. This has the advantage of only giving prime factors. Otherwise, you'll also get composite factors (e.g., this number has four prime factors, so the first method will print out not only the prime factors, but the products of various combinations of those prime factors).
If you want to optimize that a bit, you can use the sieve of Eratosthenes to find the prime numbers up to the square root, and then only attempt division by primes. In this case, the square root is ~775'000, and you only need one bit per number to signify whether it's prime. You also (normally) only want to store odd numbers (since you know immediately that all even numbers but two are composite), so you need ~775'000/2 bits = ~47 Kilobytes.
In this case, that has little real payoff though -- even a completely naive algorithm will appear to produce results instantly.
I think you're confused because there is no iff [if-and-only-if] operator.
Going to the square root of the integer in question is a good shortcut. All that remains is checking if the number within that loop divides evenly. That's simply [big number] % i == 0. There is no reason for your Prime function.
Since you are looking for the largest divisor, another trick would be to start from the highest integer less than the square root and go i--.
Like others have said, ultimately, this is brutally slow.
private static boolean isPrime(int k) throws IllegalArgumentException
{
int j;
if (k < 2) throw new IllegalArgumentException("All prime numbers are greater than 1.");
else {
for (j = 2; j < k; j++) {
if (k % j == 0) return false;
}
}
return true;
}
public static void primeFactorsOf(int n) {
boolean found = false;
if (isPrime(n) == true) System.out.print(n + " ");
else {
int i = 2;
while (found == false) {
if ((n % i == 0) && (isPrime(i))) {
System.out.print(i + ", ");
found = true;
} else i++;
}
primeFactorsOf(n / i);
}
}
For those answers which use a method isPrime(int) : boolean, there is a faster algorithm than the one previously implemented (which is something like)
private static boolean isPrime(long n) { //when n >= 2
for (int k = 2; k < n; k++)
if (n % k == 0) return false;
return true;
}
and it is this:
private static boolean isPrime(long n) { //when n >= 2
if (n == 2 || n == 3) return true;
if (n % 2 == 0 || n % 3 == 0) return false;
for (int k = 1; k <= (Math.floor(Math.sqrt(n)) + 1) / 6; k++)
if (n % (6 * k + 1) == 0 || n % (6 * k - 1) == 0) return false;
return true;
}
I made this algorithm using two facts:
We only need to check for n % k == 0 up to k <= Math.sqrt(n). This is true because for anything higher, factors merely "flip" ex. consider the case n = 15, where 3 * 5 = 5 * 3, and 5 > Math.sqrt(15). There is no need for this overlap of checking both 15 % 3 == 0 and 15 % 5 == 0, when we could just check one of these expressions.
All primes (excluding 2 and 3) can be expressed in the form (6 * k) + 1 or (6 * k) - 1, because any positive integer can be expressed in the form (6 * k) + n, where n = -1, 0, 1, 2, 3, or 4 and k is an integer <= 0, and the cases where n = 0, 2, 3, and 4 are all reducible.
Therefore, n is prime if it is not divisible by 2, 3, or some integer of the form 6k ± 1 <= Math.sqrt(n). Hence the above algorithm.
--
Wikipedia article on testing for primality
--
Edit: Thought I might as well post my full solution (*I did not use isPrime(), and my solution is nearly identical to the top answer, but I thought I should answer the actual question):
public class Euler3 {
public static void main(String[] args) {
long[] nums = {13195, 600851475143L};
for (num : nums)
System.out.println("Largest prime factor of " + num + ": " + lpf(num));
}
private static lpf(long n) {
long largestPrimeFactor = 1;
long maxPossibleFactor = n / 2;
for (long i = 2; i <= maxPossibleFactor; i++)
if (n % i == 0) {
n /= i;
largestPrimeFactor = i;
i--;
}
return largestPrimeFactor;
}
}
To find all prime factorization
import java.math.BigInteger;
import java.util.Scanner;
public class BigIntegerTest {
public static void main(String[] args) {
BigInteger myBigInteger = new BigInteger("65328734260653234260");//653234254
BigInteger originalBigInteger;
BigInteger oneAddedOriginalBigInteger;
originalBigInteger=myBigInteger;
oneAddedOriginalBigInteger=originalBigInteger.add(BigInteger.ONE);
BigInteger index;
BigInteger countBig;
for (index=new BigInteger("2"); index.compareTo(myBigInteger.add(BigInteger.ONE)) <0; index = index.add(BigInteger.ONE)){
countBig=BigInteger.ZERO;
while(myBigInteger.remainder(index) == BigInteger.ZERO ){
myBigInteger=myBigInteger.divide(index);
countBig=countBig.add(BigInteger.ONE);
}
if(countBig.equals(BigInteger.ZERO)) continue;
System.out.println(index+ "**" + countBig);
}
System.out.println("Program is ended!");
}
}
I got a very similar problem for my programming class. In my class it had to calculate for an inputted number. I used a solution very similar to Stijak. I edited my code to do the number from this problem instead of using an input.
Some differences from Stijak's code are these:
I considered even numbers in my code.
My code only prints the largest prime factor, not all factors.
I don't recalculate the factorLimit until I have divided all instances of the current factor off.
I had all the variables declared as long because I wanted the flexibility of using it for very large values of number. I found the worst case scenario was a very large prime number like 9223372036854775783, or a very large number with a prime number square root like 9223371994482243049. The more factors a number has the faster the algorithm runs. Therefore, the best case scenario would be numbers like 4611686018427387904 (2^62) or 6917529027641081856 (3*2^61) because both have 62 factors.
public class LargestPrimeFactor
{
public static void main (String[] args){
long number=600851475143L, factoredNumber=number, factor, factorLimit, maxPrimeFactor;
while(factoredNumber%2==0)
factoredNumber/=2;
factorLimit=(long)Math.sqrt(factoredNumber);
for(factor=3;factor<=factorLimit;factor+=2){
if(factoredNumber%factor==0){
do factoredNumber/=factor;
while(factoredNumber%factor==0);
factorLimit=(long)Math.sqrt(factoredNumber);
}
}
if(factoredNumber==1)
if(factor==3)
maxPrimeFactor=2;
else
maxPrimeFactor=factor-2;
else
maxPrimeFactor=factoredNumber;
if(maxPrimeFactor==number)
System.out.println("Number is prime.");
else
System.out.println("The largest prime factor is "+maxPrimeFactor);
}
}
public class Prime
{
int i;
public Prime( )
{
i = 2;
}
public boolean isPrime( int test )
{
int k;
if( test < 2 )
return false;
else if( test == 2 )
return true;
else if( ( test > 2 ) && ( test % 2 == 0 ) )
return false;
else
{
for( k = 3; k < ( test/2 ); k += 2 )
{
if( test % k == 0 )
return false;
}
}
return true;
}
public void primeFactors( int factorize )
{
if( isPrime( factorize ) )
{
System.out.println( factorize );
i = 2;
}
else
{
if( isPrime( i ) && ( factorize % i == 0 ) )
{
System.out.print( i+", " );
primeFactors( factorize / i );
}
else
{
i++;
primeFactors( factorize );
}
}
public static void main( String[ ] args )
{
Prime p = new Prime( );
p.primeFactors( 649 );
p.primeFactors( 144 );
p.primeFactors( 1001 );
}
}
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 1 year ago.
The community reviewed whether to reopen this question 7 months ago and left it closed:
Original close reason(s) were not resolved
Improve this question
I didn't find it, yet. Did I miss something?
I know a factorial method is a common example program for beginners. But wouldn't it be useful to have a standard implementation for this one to reuse?
I could use such a method with standard types (Eg. int, long...) and with BigInteger / BigDecimal, too.
Apache Commons Math has a few factorial methods in the MathUtils class.
public class UsefulMethods {
public static long factorial(int number) {
long result = 1;
for (int factor = 2; factor <= number; factor++) {
result *= factor;
}
return result;
}
}
Big Numbers version by HoldOffHunger:
public static BigInteger factorial(BigInteger number) {
BigInteger result = BigInteger.valueOf(1);
for (long factor = 2; factor <= number.longValue(); factor++) {
result = result.multiply(BigInteger.valueOf(factor));
}
return result;
}
I don't think it would be useful to have a library function for factorial. There is a good deal of research into efficient factorial implementations. Here is a handful of implementations.
Bare naked factorials are rarely needed in practice. Most often you will need one of the following:
1) divide one factorial by another, or
2) approximated floating-point answer.
In both cases, you'd be better with simple custom solutions.
In case (1), say, if x = 90! / 85!, then you'll calculate the result just as x = 86 * 87 * 88 * 89 * 90, without a need to hold 90! in memory :)
In case (2), google for "Stirling's approximation".
Use Guava's BigIntegerMath as follows:
BigInteger factorial = BigIntegerMath.factorial(n);
(Similar functionality for int and long is available in IntMath and LongMath respectively.)
Although factorials make a nice exercise for the beginning programmer, they're not very useful in most cases, and everyone knows how to write a factorial function, so they're typically not in the average library.
i believe this would be the fastest way, by a lookup table:
private static final long[] FACTORIAL_TABLE = initFactorialTable();
private static long[] initFactorialTable() {
final long[] factorialTable = new long[21];
factorialTable[0] = 1;
for (int i=1; i<factorialTable.length; i++)
factorialTable[i] = factorialTable[i-1] * i;
return factorialTable;
}
/**
* Actually, even for {#code long}, it works only until 20 inclusively.
*/
public static long factorial(final int n) {
if ((n < 0) || (n > 20))
throw new OutOfRangeException("n", 0, 20);
return FACTORIAL_TABLE[n];
}
For the native type long (8 bytes), it can only hold up to 20!
20! = 2432902008176640000(10) = 0x 21C3 677C 82B4 0000
Obviously, 21! will cause overflow.
Therefore, for native type long, only a maximum of 20! is allowed, meaningful, and correct.
Because factorial grows so quickly, stack overflow is not an issue if you use recursion. In fact, the value of 20! is the largest one can represent in a Java long. So the following method will either calculate factorial(n) or throw an IllegalArgumentException if n is too big.
public long factorial(int n) {
if (n > 20) throw new IllegalArgumentException(n + " is out of range");
return (1 > n) ? 1 : n * factorial(n - 1);
}
Another (cooler) way to do the same stuff is to use Java 8's stream library like this:
public long factorial(int n) {
if (n > 20) throw new IllegalArgumentException(n + " is out of range");
return LongStream.rangeClosed(1, n).reduce(1, (a, b) -> a * b);
}
Read more on Factorials using Java 8's streams
Apache Commons Math package has a factorial method, I think you could use that.
Short answer is: use recursion.
You can create one method and call that method right inside the same method recursively:
public class factorial {
public static void main(String[] args) {
System.out.println(calc(10));
}
public static long calc(long n) {
if (n <= 1)
return 1;
else
return n * calc(n - 1);
}
}
Try this
public static BigInteger factorial(int value){
if(value < 0){
throw new IllegalArgumentException("Value must be positive");
}
BigInteger result = BigInteger.ONE;
for (int i = 2; i <= value; i++) {
result = result.multiply(BigInteger.valueOf(i));
}
return result;
}
You can use recursion.
public static int factorial(int n){
if (n == 0)
return 1;
else
return(n * factorial(n-1));
}
and then after you create the method(function) above:
System.out.println(factorial(number of your choice));
//direct example
System.out.println(factorial(3));
I found an amazing trick to find factorials in just half the actual multiplications.
Please be patient as this is a little bit of a long post.
For Even Numbers:
To halve the multiplication with even numbers, you will end up with n/2 factors. The first factor will be the number you are taking the factorial of, then the next will be that number plus that number minus two. The next number will be the previous number plus the lasted added number minus two. You are done when the last number you added was two (i.e. 2). That probably didn't make much sense, so let me give you an example.
8! = 8 * (8 + 6 = 14) * (14 + 4 = 18) * (18 + 2 = 20)
8! = 8 * 14 * 18 * 20 which is **40320**
Note that I started with 8, then the first number I added was 6, then 4, then 2, each number added being two less then the number added before it. This method is equivalent to multiplying the least numbers with the greatest numbers, just with less multiplication, like so:
8! = 1 * 2 * 3 * 4 * 5 * 6 * 7 *
8! = (1 * 8) * (2 * 7) * (3 * 6) * (4 * 5)
8! = 8 * 14 * 18 * 20
Simple isn't it :)
Now For Odd Numbers: If the number is odd, the adding is the same, as in you subtract two each time, but you stop at three. The number of factors however changes. If you divide the number by two, you will end up with some number ending in .5. The reason is that if we multiply the ends together, that we are left with the middle number. Basically, this can all be solved by solving for a number of factors equal to the number divided by two, rounded up. This probably didn't make much sense either to minds without a mathematical background, so let me do an example:
9! = 9 * (9 + 7 = 16) * (16 + 5 = 21) * (21 + 3 = 24) * (roundUp(9/2) = 5)
9! = 9 * 16 * 21 * 24 * 5 = **362880**
Note: If you don't like this method, you could also just take the factorial of the even number before the odd (eight in this case) and multiply it by the odd number (i.e. 9! = 8! * 9).
Now let's implement it in Java:
public static int getFactorial(int num)
{
int factorial=1;
int diffrennceFromActualNum=0;
int previousSum=num;
if(num==0) //Returning 1 as factorial if number is 0
return 1;
if(num%2==0)// Checking if Number is odd or even
{
while(num-diffrennceFromActualNum>=2)
{
if(!isFirst)
{
previousSum=previousSum+(num-diffrennceFromActualNum);
}
isFirst=false;
factorial*=previousSum;
diffrennceFromActualNum+=2;
}
}
else // In Odd Case (Number * getFactorial(Number-1))
{
factorial=num*getFactorial(num-1);
}
return factorial;
}
isFirst is a boolean variable declared as static; it is used for the 1st case where we do not want to change the previous sum.
Try with even as well as for odd numbers.
The only business use for a factorial that I can think of is the Erlang B and Erlang C formulas, and not everyone works in a call center or for the phone company. A feature's usefulness for business seems to often dictate what shows up in a language - look at all the data handling, XML, and web functions in the major languages.
It is easy to keep a factorial snippet or library function for something like this around.
A very simple method to calculate factorials:
private double FACT(double n) {
double num = n;
double total = 1;
if(num != 0 | num != 1){
total = num;
}else if(num == 1 | num == 0){
total = 1;
}
double num2;
while(num > 1){
num2 = num - 1;
total = total * num2;
num = num - 1;
}
return total;
}
I have used double because they can hold massive numbers, but you can use any other type like int, long, float, etc.
P.S. This might not be the best solution but I am new to coding and it took me ages to find a simple code that could calculate factorials so I had to write the method myself but I am putting this on here so it helps other people like me.
You can use recursion version as well.
static int myFactorial(int i) {
if(i == 1)
return;
else
System.out.prinln(i * (myFactorial(--i)));
}
Recursion is usually less efficient because of having to push and pop recursions, so iteration is quicker. On the other hand, recursive versions use fewer or no local variables which is advantage.
We need to implement iteratively. If we implement recursively, it will causes StackOverflow if input becomes very big (i.e. 2 billions). And we need to use unbound size number such as BigInteger to avoid an arithmatic overflow when a factorial number becomes bigger than maximum number of a given type (i.e. 2 billion for int). You can use int for maximum 14 of factorial and long for maximum 20
of factorial before the overflow.
public BigInteger getFactorialIteratively(BigInteger input) {
if (input.compareTo(BigInteger.ZERO) <= 0) {
throw new IllegalArgumentException("zero or negatives are not allowed");
}
BigInteger result = BigInteger.ONE;
for (BigInteger i = BigInteger.ONE; i.compareTo(input) <= 0; i = i.add(BigInteger.ONE)) {
result = result.multiply(i);
}
return result;
}
If you can't use BigInteger, add an error checking.
public long getFactorialIteratively(long input) {
if (input <= 0) {
throw new IllegalArgumentException("zero or negatives are not allowed");
} else if (input == 1) {
return 1;
}
long prev = 1;
long result = 0;
for (long i = 2; i <= input; i++) {
result = prev * i;
if (result / prev != i) { // check if result holds the definition of factorial
// arithmatic overflow, error out
throw new RuntimeException("value "+i+" is too big to calculate a factorial, prev:"+prev+", current:"+result);
}
prev = result;
}
return result;
}
Factorial is highly increasing discrete function.So I think using BigInteger is better than using int.
I have implemented following code for calculation of factorial of non-negative integers.I have used recursion in place of using a loop.
public BigInteger factorial(BigInteger x){
if(x.compareTo(new BigInteger("1"))==0||x.compareTo(new BigInteger("0"))==0)
return new BigInteger("1");
else return x.multiply(factorial(x.subtract(new BigInteger("1"))));
}
Here the range of big integer is
-2^Integer.MAX_VALUE (exclusive) to +2^Integer.MAX_VALUE,
where Integer.MAX_VALUE=2^31.
However the range of the factorial method given above can be extended up to twice by using unsigned BigInteger.
We have a single line to calculate it:
Long factorialNumber = LongStream.rangeClosed(2, N).reduce(1, Math::multiplyExact);
A fairly simple method
for ( int i = 1; i < n ; i++ )
{
answer = answer * i;
}
/**
import java liberary class
*/
import java.util.Scanner;
/* class to find factorial of a number
*/
public class factorial
{
public static void main(String[] args)
{
// scanner method for read keayboard values
Scanner factor= new Scanner(System.in);
int n;
double total = 1;
double sum= 1;
System.out.println("\nPlease enter an integer: ");
n = factor.nextInt();
// evaluvate the integer is greater than zero and calculate factorial
if(n==0)
{
System.out.println(" Factorial of 0 is 1");
}
else if (n>0)
{
System.out.println("\nThe factorial of " + n + " is " );
System.out.print(n);
for(int i=1;i<n;i++)
{
do // do while loop for display each integer in the factorial
{
System.out.print("*"+(n-i) );
}
while ( n == 1);
total = total * i;
}
// calculate factorial
sum= total * n;
// display sum of factorial
System.out.println("\n\nThe "+ n +" Factorial is : "+" "+ sum);
}
// display invalid entry, if enter a value less than zero
else
{
System.out.println("\nInvalid entry!!");
}System.exit(0);
}
}
public static int fact(int i){
if(i==0)
return 0;
if(i>1){
i = i * fact(--i);
}
return i;
}
public int factorial(int num) {
if (num == 1) return 1;
return num * factorial(num - 1);
}
while loop (for small numbers)
public class factorial {
public static void main(String[] args) {
int counter=1, sum=1;
while (counter<=10) {
sum=sum*counter;
counter++;
}
System.out.println("Factorial of 10 is " +sum);
}
}
I got this from EDX use it! its called recursion
public static int factorial(int n) {
if (n == 1) {
return 1;
} else {
return n * factorial(n-1);
}
}
with recursion:
public static int factorial(int n)
{
if(n == 1)
{
return 1;
}
return n * factorial(n-1);
}
with while loop:
public static int factorial1(int n)
{
int fact=1;
while(n>=1)
{
fact=fact*n;
n--;
}
return fact;
}
using recursion is the simplest method. if we want to find the factorial of
N, we have to consider the two cases where N = 1 and N>1 since in factorial
we keep multiplying N,N-1, N-2,,,,, until 1. if we go to N= 0 we will get 0
for the answer. in order to stop the factorial reaching zero, the following
recursive method is used. Inside the factorial function,while N>1, the return
value is multiplied with another initiation of the factorial function. this
will keep the code recursively calling the factorial() until it reaches the
N= 1. for the N=1 case, it returns N(=1) itself and all the previously built
up result of multiplied return N s gets multiplied with N=1. Thus gives the
factorial result.
static int factorial(int N) {
if(N > 1) {
return n * factorial(N - 1);
}
// Base Case N = 1
else {
return N;
}
public static long factorial(int number) {
if (number < 0) {
throw new ArithmeticException(number + " is negative");
}
long fact = 1;
for (int i = 1; i <= number; ++i) {
fact *= i;
}
return fact;
}
using recursion.
public static long factorial(int number) {
if (number < 0) {
throw new ArithmeticException(number + " is negative");
}
return number == 0 || number == 1 ? 1 : number * factorial(number - 1);
}
source
Using Java 9+, you can use this solution. This uses BigInteger, ideal for holding large numbers.
...
import java.math.BigInteger;
import java.util.stream.Stream;
...
String getFactorial(int n) {
return Stream.iterate(BigInteger.ONE, i -> i.add(BigInteger.ONE)).parallel()
.limit(n).reduce(BigInteger.ONE, BigInteger::multiply).toString();
}
USING DYNAMIC PROGRAMMING IS EFFICIENT
if you want to use it to calculate again and again (like caching)
Java code:
int fact[]=new int[n+1]; //n is the required number you want to find factorial for.
int factorial(int num)
{
if(num==0){
fact[num]=1;
return fact[num];
}
else
fact[num]=(num)*factorial(num-1);
return fact[num];
}