Develop Reference

Python Rounding Down to Custom Step

We have a partially working code and 2 examples with different types of custom steps. The example 2 (Int) is working, while the example 1 is not, as it is rounding up instead of down.
import math
def step_size_to_precision(ss):
return ss.find('1') - 1
def format_value(val, step_size_str):
precision = step_size_to_precision(step_size_str)
if precision > 0:
return "{:0.0{}f}".format(val, precision)
return math.floor(int(val))
###########################
# # example 1
step_size = "0.00000100"
quantity = 0.00725562
print(quantity)
print(format_value(quantity, step_size))
# 0.00725562
# 0.007256 <= Is rounding up instead of down. Should be 0.007255
###########################
# # example 2
# step_size = "1"
# quantity = 3.00725562
# print(quantity)
# print(format_value(quantity, step_size))
# returns 3 <= This is correct
###########################
How do we fix it?

You'll want to use Decimal objects to for precise decimal numbers to begin with.
Then, use Decimal.quantize() in the ROUND_DOWN mode.
from decimal import Decimal, ROUND_DOWN
quantity = 0.00725562
step_size = Decimal("0.000001")
print(Decimal(quantity).quantize(step_size, ROUND_DOWN))
prints out
0.007255

Another approach is outlined in this SO answer:
If you want to round down always (instead of rounding to the nearest
precision), then do so, explicitly, with the math.floor()
function:
from math import floor
def floored_percentage(val, digits):
val *= 10 ** (digits + 2)
return '{1:.{0}f}%'.format(digits, floor(val) / 10 ** digits)
print floored_percentage(0.995, 1)
Demo:
>>> from math import floor
>>> def floored_percentage(val, digits):
... val *= 10 ** (digits + 2)
... return '{1:.{0}f}%'.format(digits, floor(val) / 10 ** digits)
...
>>> floored_percentage(0.995, 1)
'99.5%'
>>> floored_percentage(0.995, 2)
'99.50%'
>>> floored_percentage(0.99987, 2)
'99.98%'
For your example:
import math
def step_size_to_precision(ss):
return max(ss.find('1'), 1) - 1
def format_value(val, step_size):
digits = step_size_to_precision(step_size)
val *= 10 ** digits
return '{1:.{0}f}'.format(digits, math.floor(val) / 10 ** digits)
step_size = "0.00000100"
quantity = 0.00725562
print(quantity)
print(format_value(quantity, step_size))
# prints out: 0.007255

A more general approach which allows to round down for step_size which is not only power of 10:
from decimal import Decimal
def floor_step_size(quantity, step_size):
step_size_dec = Decimal(str(step_size))
return float(int(Decimal(str(quantity)) / step_size_dec) * step_size_dec)
Usage:
>>> floor_step_size(0.00725562, "0.00000100")
0.007255
>>> floor_step_size(3.00725562, "1")
3.0
>>> floor_step_size(2.6, "0.25")
2.5
>>> floor_step_size(0.9, "0.2")
0.8

Decimal To Binary Python Getting an Extra Zero In Return String

This is for a school project. I need to create a function using recursion to convert an integer to binary string. It must be a str returned, not an int. The base case is n==0, and then 0 would need to be returned. There must be a base case like this, but this is where I think I am getting the extra 0 from (I could be wrong). I am using Python 3.6 with the IDLE and the shell to execute it.
The function works just fine, expect for this additional zero that I need gone.
Here is my function, dtobr:
def dtobr(n):
"""
(int) -> (str)
This function has the parameter n, which is a non-negative integer,
and it will return the string of 0/1's
which is the binary representation of n. No side effects.
Returns bianry string as mentioned. This is like the function
dtob (decimal to bianary) but this is using recursion.
Examples:
>>> dtob(27)
'11011'
>>> dtob(0)
'0'
>>> dtob(1)
'1'
>>> dtob(2)
'10'
"""
if n == 0:
return str(0)
return dtobr(n // 2) + str(n % 2)
This came from the function I already wrote which converted it just fine, but without recursion. For reference, I will include this code as well, but this is not what I need for this project, and there are no errors with this:
def dtob(n):
"""
(int) -> (str)
This function has the parameter n, which is a non-negative integer,
and it will return the string of 0/1's
which is the binary representation of n. No side effects.
Returns bianry string as mentioned.
Examples:
>>> dtob(27)
'11011'
>>> dtob(0)
'0'
>>> dtob(1)
'1'
>>> dtob(2)
'10'
"""
string = ""
if n == 0:
return str(0)
while n > 0:
remainder = n % 2
string = str(remainder) + string
n = n // 2
Hopefully someone can help me get ride of that additional left hand zero. Thanks!

You need to change the condition to recursively handle both the n // 2 and n % 2:
if n <= 1:
return str(n) # per #pault's suggestion, only needed str(n) instead of str(n % 2)
else:
return dtobr(n // 2) + dtobr(n % 2)
Test case:
for i in [0, 1, 2, 27]:
print(dtobr(i))
# 0
# 1
# 10
# 11011
FYI you can easily convert to binary format like so:
'{0:b}'.format(x) # where x is your number

Since there is already an answer that points and resolves the issue with recursive way, lets see some interesting ways to achieve same goal.
Lets define a generator that will give us iterative way of getting binary numbers.
def to_binary(n):
if n == 0: yield "0"
while n > 0:
yield str(n % 2)
n = n / 2
Then you can use this iterable to get decimal to binary conversion in multiple ways.
Example 1.
reduce function is used to concatenate chars received from to_binary iterable (generator).
from functools import reduce
def to_binary(n):
if n == 0: yield "0"
while n > 0:
yield str(n % 2)
n = n / 2
print reduce(lambda x, y: x+y, to_binary(0)) # 0
print reduce(lambda x, y: x+y, to_binary(15)) # 1111
print reduce(lambda x, y: x+y, to_binary(15)) # 11011
Example 2.
join takes iterable, unrolls it and joins them by ''
def to_binary(n):
if n == 0: yield "0"
while n > 0:
yield str(n % 2)
n = n / 2
print ''.join(to_binary(0)) # 0
print ''.join(to_binary(1)) # 1
print ''.join(to_binary(15)) # 1111
print ''.join(to_binary(27)) # 11011

How to know all bases and exponents of a number?

I want to find all bases and exponents of a number.
Example:
Number = 64
2^6=64
4^3=64
8^2=64
64^1=64
Number = 1845.28125
4.5^5=1845.28125
Number = 19683
3^9=19683
27^3=19683
19683^1=19683
What I do now is to make an integer of 'Number' and just see of the results of multiple calculations gives the correct result:
basehits, expohits = [], []
if eval(Number) > 1000:
to = 1000 #base max 1000 in order to avoid too many calculations
else:
to = int(eval(Number))
for n in range(1,to):
for s in range(1,31): #just try with exponents from 1 to 30
calcres = pow(n,s)
if calcres == eval(Number):
basehits.append(n)
expohits.append(s)
elif calcres > eval(Number):
break
The problem is that this never find a Floating Number as for example 1845.28125 (see above).
Is there a better way to find exponents and bases when only the result is known?

Your problem needs more constraints, but here's some help:
>>> from math import log
>>> help(log)
Help on built-in function log in module math:
log(...)
log(x[, base])
Return the logarithm of x to the given base.
If the base not specified, returns the natural logarithm (base e) of x.
>>> for base in range(2, 10):
... exp = log(64, base)
... print('%s ^ %s = %s' % (base, exp, base ** exp))
...
2 ^ 6.0 = 64.0
3 ^ 3.785578521428744 = 63.99999999999994
4 ^ 3.0 = 64.0
5 ^ 2.5840593484403582 = 63.99999999999999
6 ^ 2.3211168434072493 = 63.99999999999998
7 ^ 2.1372431226481328 = 63.999999999999964
8 ^ 2.0 = 64.0
9 ^ 1.892789260714372 = 63.99999999999994

how about
import math
num=64
for i in range(2,int(math.sqrt(num))+1):
if math.log(num,i).is_integer():
print i,int(math.log(num,i))
the output is:
2 6
4 3
8 2
and of course, you can always add:
print num,1
to get
64,1
If you want to add fractions, with n decimal digits after the dot, you can use this:
from __future__ import division
import math
num=1845.28125
decimal_digits=1
ans=3
x=1
while(ans>=2):
ans=num**(1/x)
if (ans*10**decimal_digits).is_integer():
print ans,x
x+=1
where decimal_digits indicates the number of places after the dot.
For this example the answer will be
4.5 5,
If you change for example num to 39.0625 and decimal_digits to 2, the output will be:
2.5 4
6.25 2

Integers
For integers you could look at the prime factors of your number. Once you know that 64 is 2**6, it's easy to list all the results you wanted.
Now, which result do you expect for numbers that have at least 2 different prime factors? For example : should 15 be written 3*5, 3**1 * 5**1 or 15**1?
Floats
It's not clear how your problem is defined for Floats.
What's special about 4.5?
If you calculate 1845.28125**(1.0/5), Python returns 4.5, but for other input numbers, the result might be off by 1e-16.
Possible solution
import math
def find_possible_bases(num, min_base = 1.9, max_decimals = 9, max_diff = 1e-15):
max_exponent = int(math.ceil(math.log(num,min_base)))
for exp in range(1,max_exponent):
base = round(num**(1.0/exp),max_decimals)
diff = abs(base**exp-num)
if diff < max_diff:
print('%.10g ** %d = %.10g' % (base, exp, base ** exp))
find_possible_bases(64)
# 64 ** 1 = 64
# 8 ** 2 = 64
# 4 ** 3 = 64
# 2 ** 6 = 64
find_possible_bases(19683)
# 19683 ** 1 = 19683
# 27 ** 3 = 19683
# 3 ** 9 = 19683
find_possible_bases(1845.28125)
# 1845.28 ** 1 = 1845.28
# 4.5 ** 5 = 1845.28
find_possible_bases(15)
# 15 ** 1 = 15
It iterates over possible exponents, and calculates what the base would be. It rounds it to 9 decimals, and checks what the error becomes. If it's small enough, it displays the result. You could play with the parameters and find what best suits your problem.
As a bonus, it also works fine with Integers (e.g. 64 and 15).
It might be better to work with Rational numbers.

Format decimal without trailing zeros [duplicate]

I have a long list of Decimals and that I have to adjust by factors of 10, 100, 1000,..... 1000000 depending on certain conditions. When I multiply them there is sometimes a useless trailing zero (though not always) that I want to get rid of. For example...
from decimal import Decimal
# outputs 25.0, PROBLEM! I would like it to output 25
print Decimal('2.5') * 10
# outputs 2567.8000, PROBLEM! I would like it to output 2567.8
print Decimal('2.5678') * 1000
Is there a function that tells the decimal object to drop these insignificant zeros? The only way I can think of doing this is to convert to a string and replace them using regular expressions.
Should probably mention that I am using python 2.6.5
EDIT
senderle's fine answer made me realize that I occasionally get a number like 250.0 which when normalized produces 2.5E+2. I guess in these cases I could try to sort them out and convert to a int

You can use the normalize method to remove extra precision.
>>> print decimal.Decimal('5.500')
5.500
>>> print decimal.Decimal('5.500').normalize()
5.5
To avoid stripping zeros to the left of the decimal point, you could do this:
def normalize_fraction(d):
normalized = d.normalize()
sign, digits, exponent = normalized.as_tuple()
if exponent > 0:
return decimal.Decimal((sign, digits + (0,) * exponent, 0))
else:
return normalized
Or more compactly, using quantize as suggested by user7116:
def normalize_fraction(d):
normalized = d.normalize()
sign, digit, exponent = normalized.as_tuple()
return normalized if exponent <= 0 else normalized.quantize(1)
You could also use to_integral() as shown here but I think using as_tuple this way is more self-documenting.
I tested these both against a few cases; please leave a comment if you find something that doesn't work.
>>> normalize_fraction(decimal.Decimal('55.5'))
Decimal('55.5')
>>> normalize_fraction(decimal.Decimal('55.500'))
Decimal('55.5')
>>> normalize_fraction(decimal.Decimal('55500'))
Decimal('55500')
>>> normalize_fraction(decimal.Decimal('555E2'))
Decimal('55500')

There's probably a better way of doing this, but you could use .rstrip('0').rstrip('.') to achieve the result that you want.
Using your numbers as an example:
>>> s = str(Decimal('2.5') * 10)
>>> print s.rstrip('0').rstrip('.') if '.' in s else s
25
>>> s = str(Decimal('2.5678') * 1000)
>>> print s.rstrip('0').rstrip('.') if '.' in s else s
2567.8
And here's the fix for the problem that #gerrit pointed out in the comments:
>>> s = str(Decimal('1500'))
>>> print s.rstrip('0').rstrip('.') if '.' in s else s
1500

Answer from the Decimal FAQ in the documentation:
>>> def remove_exponent(d):
... return d.quantize(Decimal(1)) if d == d.to_integral() else d.normalize()
>>> remove_exponent(Decimal('5.00'))
Decimal('5')
>>> remove_exponent(Decimal('5.500'))
Decimal('5.5')
>>> remove_exponent(Decimal('5E+3'))
Decimal('5000')

Answer is mentioned in FAQ (https://docs.python.org/2/library/decimal.html#decimal-faq) but does not explain things.
To drop trailing zeros for fraction part you should use normalize:
>>> Decimal('100.2000').normalize()
Decimal('100.2')
>> Decimal('0.2000').normalize()
Decimal('0.2')
But this works different for numbers with leading zeros in sharp part:
>>> Decimal('100.0000').normalize()
Decimal('1E+2')
In this case we should use `to_integral':
>>> Decimal('100.000').to_integral()
Decimal('100')
So we could check if there's a fraction part:
>>> Decimal('100.2000') == Decimal('100.2000').to_integral()
False
>>> Decimal('100.0000') == Decimal('100.0000').to_integral()
True
And use appropriate method then:
def remove_exponent(num):
return num.to_integral() if num == num.to_integral() else num.normalize()
Try it:
>>> remove_exponent(Decimal('100.2000'))
Decimal('100.2')
>>> remove_exponent(Decimal('100.0000'))
Decimal('100')
>>> remove_exponent(Decimal('0.2000'))
Decimal('0.2')
Now we're done.

Use the format specifier %g. It seems remove to trailing zeros.
>>> "%g" % (Decimal('2.5') * 10)
'25'
>>> "%g" % (Decimal('2.5678') * 1000)
'2567.8'
It also works without the Decimal function
>>> "%g" % (2.5 * 10)
'25'
>>> "%g" % (2.5678 * 1000)
'2567.8'

I ended up doing this:
import decimal
def dropzeros(number):
mynum = decimal.Decimal(number).normalize()
# e.g 22000 --> Decimal('2.2E+4')
return mynum.__trunc__() if not mynum % 1 else float(mynum)
print dropzeros(22000.000)
22000
print dropzeros(2567.8000)
2567.8
note: casting the return value as a string will limit you to 12 significant digits

Slightly modified version of A-IV's answer
NOTE that Decimal('0.99999999999999999999999999995').normalize() will round to Decimal('1')
def trailing(s: str, char="0"):
return len(s) - len(s.rstrip(char))
def decimal_to_str(value: decimal.Decimal):
"""Convert decimal to str
* Uses exponential notation when there are more than 4 trailing zeros
* Handles decimal.InvalidOperation
"""
# to_integral_value() removes decimals
if value == value.to_integral_value():
try:
value = value.quantize(decimal.Decimal(1))
except decimal.InvalidOperation:
pass
uncast = str(value)
# use exponential notation if there are more that 4 zeros
return str(value.normalize()) if trailing(uncast) > 4 else uncast
else:
# normalize values with decimal places
return str(value.normalize())
# or str(value).rstrip('0') if rounding edgecases are a concern

You could use :g to achieve this:
'{:g}'.format(3.140)
gives
'3.14'

This should work:
'{:f}'.format(decimal.Decimal('2.5') * 10).rstrip('0').rstrip('.')

Just to show a different possibility, I used to_tuple() to achieve the same result.
def my_normalize(dec):
"""
>>> my_normalize(Decimal("12.500"))
Decimal('12.5')
>>> my_normalize(Decimal("-0.12500"))
Decimal('-0.125')
>>> my_normalize(Decimal("0.125"))
Decimal('0.125')
>>> my_normalize(Decimal("0.00125"))
Decimal('0.00125')
>>> my_normalize(Decimal("125.00"))
Decimal('125')
>>> my_normalize(Decimal("12500"))
Decimal('12500')
>>> my_normalize(Decimal("0.000"))
Decimal('0')
"""
if dec is None:
return None
sign, digs, exp = dec.as_tuple()
for i in list(reversed(digs)):
if exp >= 0 or i != 0:
break
exp += 1
digs = digs[:-1]
if not digs and exp < 0:
exp = 0
return Decimal((sign, digs, exp))

Why not use modules 10 from a multiple of 10 to check if there is remainder? No remainder means you can force int()
if (x * 10) % 10 == 0:
x = int(x)
x = 2/1
Output: 2
x = 3/2
Output: 1.5

Imprecise results of logarithm and power functions in Python

I am trying to complete the following exercise:
https://www.codewars.com/kata/whats-a-perfect-power-anyway/train/python
I tried multiple variations, but my code breaks down when big numbers are involved (I tried multiple variations with solutions involving log and power functions):
Exercise:
Your task is to check wheter a given integer is a perfect power. If it is a perfect power, return a pair m and k with m^k = n as a proof. Otherwise return Nothing, Nil, null, None or your language's equivalent.
Note: For a perfect power, there might be several pairs. For example 81 = 3^4 = 9^2, so (3,4) and (9,2) are valid solutions. However, the tests take care of this, so if a number is a perfect power, return any pair that proves it.
The exercise uses Python 3.4.3
My code:
import math
def isPP(n):
for i in range(2 +n%2,n,2):
a = math.log(n,i)
if int(a) == round(a, 1):
if pow(i, int(a)) == n:
return [i, int(a)]
return None
Question:
How is it possible that I keep getting incorrect answers for bigger numbers? I read that in Python 3, all ints are treated as "long" from Python 2, i.e. they can be very large and still represented accurately. Thus, since i and int(a) are both ints, shouldn't the pow(i, int(a)) == n be assessed correctly? I'm actually baffled.

(edit note: also added integer nth root bellow)
you are in the right track with logarithm but you are doing the math wrong, also you are skipping number you should not and only testing all the even number or all the odd number without considering that a number can be even with a odd power or vice-versa
check this
>>> math.log(170**3,3)
14.02441559235585
>>>
not even close, the correct method is described here Nth root
which is:
let x be the number to calculate the Nth root, n said root and r the result, then we get
rn = x
take the log in any base from both sides, and solve for r
logb( rn ) = logb( x )
n * logb( r ) = logb( x )
logb( r ) = logb( x ) / n
blogb( r ) = blogb( x ) / n
r = blogb( x ) / n
so for instance with log in base 10 we get
>>> pow(10, math.log10(170**3)/3 )
169.9999999999999
>>>
that is much more closer, and with just rounding it we get the answer
>>> round(169.9999999999999)
170
>>>
therefore the function should be something like this
import math
def isPP(x):
for n in range(2, 1+round(math.log2(x)) ):
root = pow( 10, math.log10(x)/n )
result = round(root)
if result**n == x:
return result,n
the upper limit in range is to avoid testing numbers that will certainly fail
test
>>> isPP(170**3)
(170, 3)
>>> isPP(6434856)
(186, 3)
>>> isPP(9**2)
(9, 2)
>>> isPP(23**8)
(279841, 2)
>>> isPP(279841)
(529, 2)
>>> isPP(529)
(23, 2)
>>>
EDIT
or as Tin Peters point out you can use pow(x,1./n) as the nth root of a number is also expressed as x1/n
for example
>>> pow(170**3, 1./3)
169.99999999999994
>>> round(_)
170
>>>
but keep in mind that that will fail for extremely large numbers like for example
>>> pow(8191**107,1./107)
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "<pyshell#90>", line 1, in <module>
pow(8191**107,1./107)
OverflowError: int too large to convert to float
>>>
while the logarithmic approach will success
>>> pow(10, math.log10(8191**107)/107)
8190.999999999999
>>>
the reason is that 8191107 is simple too big, it have 419 digits which is greater that the maximum float representable, but reducing it with a log produce a more reasonable number
EDIT 2
now if you want to work with numbers ridiculously big, or just plain don't want to use floating point arithmetic altogether and use only integer arithmetic, then the best course of action is to use the method of Newton, that the helpful link provided by Tin Peters for the particular case for cube root, show us the way to do it in general alongside the wikipedia article
def inthroot(A,n):
if A<0:
if n%2 == 0:
raise ValueError
return - inthroot(-A,n)
if A==0:
return 0
n1 = n-1
if A.bit_length() < 1024: # float(n) safe from overflow
xk = int( round( pow(A,1/n) ) )
xk = ( n1*xk + A//pow(xk,n1) )//n # Ensure xk >= floor(nthroot(A)).
else:
xk = 1 << -(-A.bit_length()//n) # power of 2 closer but greater than the nth root of A
while True:
sig = A // pow(xk,n1)
if xk <= sig:
return xk
xk = ( n1*xk + sig )//n
check the explanation by Mark Dickinson to understand the working of the algorithm for the case of cube root, which is basically the same for this
now lets compare this with the other one
>>> def nthroot(x,n):
return pow(10, math.log10(x)/n )
>>> n = 2**(2**12) + 1 # a ridiculously big number
>>> r = nthroot(n**2,2)
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "<pyshell#48>", line 1, in <module>
nthroot(n**2,2)
File "<pyshell#47>", line 2, in nthroot
return pow(10, math.log10(x)/n )
OverflowError: (34, 'Result too large')
>>> r = inthroot(n**2,2)
>>> r == n
True
>>>
then the function is now
import math
def isPPv2(x):
for n in range(2,1+round(math.log2(x))):
root = inthroot(x,n)
if root**n == x:
return root,n
test
>>> n = 2**(2**12) + 1 # a ridiculously big number
>>> r,p = isPPv2(n**23)
>>> p
23
>>> r == n
True
>>> isPPv2(170**3)
(170, 3)
>>> isPPv2(8191**107)
(8191, 107)
>>> isPPv2(6434856)
(186, 3)
>>>
now lets check isPP vs isPPv2
>>> x = (1 << 53) + 1
>>> x
9007199254740993
>>> isPP(x**2)
>>> isPPv2(x**2)
(9007199254740993, 2)
>>>
clearly, avoiding floating point is the best choice