I am trying to learn how to program in C++, so I created something that allowed to you enter a minimum, and maximum parameter, and it will compute k+(k+1)+(k+2)+...+(max), and compared it to the analytical value, using the standard formula (n(n+1)/2). It seems to work fine when I try small numbers, but when, for example, trying min=4, max=4*10^5 (400,000), I get a negative result for the sum, but a positive result checking with the analytical method, even after changing the type from 'int' to 'long'. Trying other combinations, I have achieved the opposite, with the analytical method resulting in a negative sum. I suspect this is related to the fact the type int can go up to a certain number of digits, but I wanted some confirmation on that, and if it isn't, what the actual problem is. The code is provided below:
#include <iostream>
// Values are inconsistent when paramin,parammax become large.
// For example, try (parammin,parammax)=(4,400,000)
int main() {
int parammax,parammin;
std::cout << "Input a minimum, then maximum parameter to sum up to" << std::endl;
std::cin >> parammin >> parammax;
int sum=0;
for (int iter = parammin; iter <= parammax; iter++){
sum += iter;
}
std::cout << "The sum is: " << sum << std::endl;
const int analyticalmethod = (parammax*(parammax+1)-parammin*(parammin-1))/2;
std::cout << "The analytical result for the sum is,"
" via (max*(max+1)-min*(min-1))/2: "
<< analyticalmethod << std::endl;
return 0;
}
Using very large numbers without control is dangerous in C++. The basic types int, long and long long are implementation dependant, with only the following requirements:
int is at least 16 bits largelong is at least as large as int and at least 32 bits largelong long is at least as large as long and at least 64 bits largeIf you think you can need larger values, you should considere a multi precision library like the excellent gmp.