Talk:Negafibonacci coding

The printable version is no longer supported and may have rendering errors. Please update your browser bookmarks and please use the default browser print function instead.

Skip to table of contents

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Negafibonacci coding article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Merge with Negafibonacci

I'm wondering if this page should be merged with Negafibonacci. Thoughts? Jaswenso (talk) 08:58, 18 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think it should be moved, since WP uses a naming system that is case sensitive except for the first letter. RJFJR (talk) 01:42, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Example

Something is wrong with the example. The description says all codes end in 11 but the code for zero is 01. RJFJR (talk) 01:42, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have edited the article. Zero simply cannot be encoded. Zero is represented as the empty sum, but you need at least one term to terminate a code, just as with normal Fibonacci coding. Unfortunately I can't find any sources that aren't copies of Wikipedia or anything better. This is one sad article. --Jonathanvt (talk) 09:50, 8 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Encoding

The described algorithm is wrong. Counterexample: -18. Algorithm fails after generating [-21,5] instead of [-21,2,1]. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.172.9.250 (talk) 01:47, 12 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Title case?

Is the a good reason for the unusual case used in this article's title? If not, then it should be moved to Negafibonacci coding. – Scyrme (talk) 15:45, 26 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I've gone ahead and moved it; rationale, as given in the edit summary: Reliable sources use it without the irregular unhyphenated, mid-word capitalisation, so there's no reason the title of the article should use this bizarre capitalisation. – Scyrme (talk) 23:03, 23 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]