DocOz Episode Clip: Top Rated Ep [5/27]

[Consumer Insider-Tip]

You want to do something about your weight but you have lack of motivation. This will give you the boost to drop 22 pounds without lifting a finger.


Oprah is a prime example - The doctors explain how this is possible.
She is 4 dress-sizes smaller: http://www.jobhupsail.com/Today/-Oprah-shows-revealingSecret.html


---
What To Expect:
- No Need to workout
- No need to restrict foods you love
- No need to change your current lifestyle


The Video is Now Live: - http://www.jobhupsail.com/Today/-Oprah-shows-revealingSecret.html







Local Listings || Episodes || Videos || Community || Meet Us
>From CBD Telmo Distribution |307 W. Marion St|Madison|MO|65263















This Week:
Bullied Teens Battle to Regrow Hair; Shocking Brain Surgery
--
Washing Machine Dangers; Counterfeit Condoms; Bizarre in the ER


Want__to end-ads from us please nav to http://www.jobhupsail.com/42_a.htmll or you can write.

You can ref this message with ID-00887df7-f0bd-44da-b06b-a901164b6409 for episodes and clips.



7
I have 3 very large signed integers.

long x = long.MaxValue;
long y = long.MaxValue - 1;
long z = long.MaxValue - 2;
I want to calculate their truncated average. Expected average value is long.MaxValue - 1, which is 9223372036854775806.

It is impossible to calculate it as:

long avg = (x + y + z) / 3; // 3074457345618258600
Note: I read all those questions about average of 2 numbers, but I don't see how that technique can be applied to average of 3 numbers.

It would be very easy with the usage of BigInteger, but let's assume I cannot use it.

BigInteger bx = new BigInteger(x);
BigInteger by = new BigInteger(y);
BigInteger bz = new BigInteger(z);
BigInteger bavg = (bx + by + bz) / 3; // 9223372036854775806
If I convert to double, then, of course, I lose precision:


I know how to fix this, as it is legal to have both an explicit and implicit interface, plus I can make the implicit interface implementation completely private.

Yet I am wondering about the reasoning behind this. Because technically, the internally compiled private method set_IConnection_ConnectionString does not need to be part of the interface, right? It could just be seen as an auxiliary setter, not part of the interface, as it is in the implicit implementation situation.

Update: as a bonus, the seemingly confusing, and in my opinion not quite right compile error you receive is the following: