Maximum tiling order

Maximum tiling order

Will there by a maximum on the number of squares per candidate tiling?

From another thread, it was said that a dimension of an encoded rectangle would be within a signed 32-bit, which implies that the largest case (largest rectangle: 2^31-1 x 2^31-1, smallest squares: 1x1) is nearly 2^62 squares.

6 posts / 0 new
Last post
For more complete information about compiler optimizations, see our Optimization Notice.

Hi,
We haven't set a limit on the maximum and I did not understand why this would be a concern for coding this problem statement. Can you please clarify?

Thanks
-Rama

Quoting Rama Kishan Malladi (Intel)
We haven't set a limit on the maximum and I did not understand why this would be a concern for coding this problem statement. Can you please clarify?
Ok, sorry for the noise.

I think there's a need to know the maximum order - some languages can't allocate an array with more than 2^31 elements. If we know for sure that the maximum order is less than (say 2^30), then a simple array will suffice. If the order is larger, then we need more exotic storage schemes.

For example, the calculation of area you need to use int64.

Otherwise out of range

Hi,
Use datatypes as you feel appropriate and necessary. We would have the dimensions of the rectangle created to fit into a 32-bit signed integer.

Thanks
-Rama

Leave a Comment

Please sign in to add a comment. Not a member? Join today