Liberation through Computer Literacy

[ejolson]

And this is my new code with decimal conversion. Still need to work on the decimal conversion to print! it is the slowest part. I wonder if it is not because of memory cache.

I put Heater binary to decimal version from his code and I also add the dabble method.

It is possible I should take the blame for b2print. Between b2print, double_dabble32 and double_dabble64 which is faster?

[Heater]

ejolson,

If you don't mind the colour pink, see also...

I really wish you hadn't done that. I feel nauseous. And it does not say anything useful anyway.

Anyway you are right. If we print the type of what finally get's printed we see:

For fibo.py: <class 'int'>

For fibo_phi.pi: <class 'decimal.Decimal'>

Clearly the decimal class has it's own print method which is much faster.

[Heater]

danjperron,

Then What do I do? if the fibo ask is only 1 and the other 10000000.

One can calculate how many digits a fibo(n) result will have, without actually having to calculate the fibo(n) itself:

See here: http://www.maths.surrey.ac.uk/hosted-si ... section2.3

And hence one can preallocate the correct size arrays at start up.

Which is what ejoson does in his Classic BASIC fibo.

Your current algorithm figure out fibo using pre-calculated fibonacci number with lower values.

Strangely enough my fibo in Javascript uses memoization, all we need to do is to use the file system instead of memory for the memoized sub-fibos.

Sadly Fibonacci numbers don't compress very well. gzip only reduces fibo(4784969) by about half in size.

[Paeryn]

@Paeryn

Yes that version has some bugs .

But

Code: Select all

realloc(fibs, sizeof(Fibs_struct)*fibs_size);
Do you really want to realloc fibs and throw away it's new location if it got moved?

Then What do I do? if the fibo ask is only 1 and the other 10000000.

I gave an example, realloc() returns a pointer to the start of the re-allocated block. If there was space directly after to extend the block then the pointer won't have changed. If it failed to allocate the new size then it returns NULL. If there wasn't space directly after that block to extend into then a new block of the new size will be allocated, the contents of the old block will be copied to the new block, the old block will be have free() called on it and the address of the new block is returned.
In your usage, if the re-allocated block was put somewhere else you would have been reading data from whatever happens to be allocated that memory.

You have v declared as unsigned long long, but you are multiplying two unsigned long values, that will result in an unsigned long value (just the lower half of the result) which is then promoted and stored in v, the upper half of the result is thrown away.

I don't think so! The compiler will deal with it!

Code: Select all

#include <stdlib.h>
#include <stdio.h>

int main(void)
{

  unsigned long a,b;
  unsigned long long c;

  a = 0xffffffff;
  b = 0x80000000;

  c = a * b;

  printf("%8lX * %8lX = %16llX\n",a,b,c);

 return 0;
}

and the result

MacBook-Air-de-Daniel:~ daniel$ ./t1
FFFFFFFF * 80000000 = 7FFFFFFF80000000

That is on your macbook, try it on the RPi and see. C says a mathematical operator only has to return the same type as its operators, the type of variable you are assigning to has no bearing on the types used in the calculation.

[gkreidl]

The riddle of slow or fast printing (Python, both algorithms)

Before anything can be printed it has to be converted to a string. The conversion of the fibo(4784969) bigint takes about 301 seconds

Code: Select all

res = fibo(4784969)
t = time.time()
restr = str(res)
print (time.time()-t)

The conversion of the high precision Decimal using the Phi algorithm into a string takes almost no time (0.01 sec.).The reason is quite simple and can be found by studying the original decimal module written in Python (used up to Python version 3.4, the binary compiled C version has been added in 3.5). The internal representation of decimals is already a string.

[Heater]

Thanks for the confirmation. That is pretty much what we guessed.

Time for another Python big fibo using the fast algorithm with Decimals.

[danjperron]

Code: Select all

Maybe so, but to use Python 3, your program should start
Code: Select all

#!/usr/bin/env python3
They're best thought of as two completely separate languages, united by a common fear of HTML text normalization.

Yes this is a mistake of my part. ;-(

I Always using the correct python interpreter on the prefix command.
I create the program using my Mac! Then I forget to change the env variable since my Mac only have python3

B.T.W. The realloc program in my C version is not a big issue. It is only to hold previous calculated value of Fibo.
The pointer in the table for the correct value is just a pointer .
Then fibo(4784969) will create a table of 59 calculated values. Since a put 100 structures increment it doesn't do a realloc at all.

Code: Select all

fibo( 3 )
fibo( 5 )
fibo( 4 )
fibo( 10 )
fibo( 9 )
fibo( 19 )
fibo( 8 )
fibo( 18 )
fibo( 37 )
fibo( 17 )
fibo( 36 )
fibo( 74 )
fibo( 73 )
fibo( 147 )
fibo( 35 )
fibo( 72 )
fibo( 146 )
fibo( 293 )
fibo( 145 )
fibo( 292 )
fibo( 585 )
fibo( 291 )
fibo( 584 )
fibo( 1169 )
fibo( 583 )
fibo( 1168 )
fibo( 2337 )
fibo( 1167 )
fibo( 2336 )
fibo( 4673 )
fibo( 2335 )
fibo( 4672 )
fibo( 9346 )
fibo( 9345 )
fibo( 18692 )
fibo( 18691 )
fibo( 37383 )
fibo( 4671 )
fibo( 9344 )
fibo( 18690 )
fibo( 37382 )
fibo( 74766 )
fibo( 74765 )
fibo( 149531 )
fibo( 37381 )
fibo( 74764 )
fibo( 149530 )
fibo( 299061 )
fibo( 149529 )
fibo( 299060 )
fibo( 598122 )
fibo( 598121 )
fibo( 1196243 )
fibo( 299059 )
fibo( 598120 )
fibo( 1196242 )
fibo( 2392485 )
fibo( 1196241 )
fibo( 2392484 )
fibo( 4784969 )

I just test the code on my rock64 with 4G Bytes of ram running a 64 bit version of Ubuntu.

The decimals version is faster! The fibo_phy is to slow at converting the binary to string..

Code: Select all

[email protected]:~$ python --version
Python 3.6.5
[email protected]:~$ cat /proc/version
Linux version 4.4.132-1075-rockchip-ayufan-ga83beded8524 (ro[email protected]) (gcc version 7.3.0 (Ubuntu/Linaro 7.3.0-16ubuntu3) ) #1 SMP Thu Jul 26 08:22:22 UTC 2018
[email protected]:~$ uname -m
aarch64
[email protected]:~$ time python3 ./fibo_phy.py 
442948
1072739564180047722936481359622500432190722117323735062984 .....
    ...   0149736853685001275152076875379936330930391815964864885353407167474856539211500699706378405156269
Run time = 4.542796907946467

real    1m37.494s
user    1m37.408s
sys     0m0.068s

[email protected]:~$ time python3 fibo_decimals.py 4784969 
1000013
1072739564180047722936481359622500432190722117323735062984....
  ...    0149736853685001275152076875379936330930391815964864885353407167474856539211500699706378405156269

real    1m7.719s
user    1m7.400s
sys     0m0.309s
[email protected]:~$

[ejolson]

The riddle of slow or fast printing (Python, both algorithms)

Before anything can be printed it has to be converted to a string. The conversion of the fibo(4784969) bigint takes about 301 seconds

Code: Select all

res = fibo(4784969)
t = time.time()
restr = str(res)
print (time.time()-t)

The conversion of the high precision Decimal using the Phi algorithm into a string takes almost no time (0.01 sec.).The reason is quite simple and can be found by studying the original decimal module written in Python (used up to Python version 3.4, the binary compiled C version has been added in 3.5). The internal representation of decimals is already a string.

The improvement in speed resulting from the C implementation of Decimal used in Python 3.5 and greater may explain why Python 2 seems so slow. Likely it still uses the native Python version of Decimal.

While fast computational speed is important, rather than rewriting the Python code for the Decimal library in C, if it remained written in Python and instead the speed of the Python language itself was improved, that would be more liberating for the beginning programmer who knows only Python.

I recently attended a talk given by a graduate student as part of their master's thesis defense. The topic was how to obtain correct statistics characterising goodness of fit when performing a linear regression in R on data which has been tabulated according to frequency. Since unpacking the data into the format needed by the standard routines required magnitudes more memory than available (on a server with 384GB RAM) the idea was to calculate directly with the tabulated data. This has a speed advantage as well. At some point during the talk the question was asked, why not simply modify the old routine to use the new formulas. The answer was that the original routine called C and Fortran subroutines and modifying those was too difficult for someone who knows only R.

People who have mastered and regularly use a language are more likely to care enough to improve it. However, if fixing bugs in Python and R requires knowing C and Fortran, then who will fix the bugs?

[John_Spikowski]

Beyond who, when?

Open source can be restrictive if part of popular distribution. I enjoy the freedom to innovate by gluing stuff together.

[Heater]

ScriptBasic,

Open source can be restrictive if part of popular distribution

Could you please elaborate on what you mean by that? How is having any Open Source program included in a distribution in anyway restrictive?

I enjoy the freedom to innovate by gluing stuff together.

As do most Pi users and people who are into software in general.

Open Source software is an amazingly useful and plentiful source of parts for such "gluing together" projects.

Conversely there is often no freedom to innovate by gluing together parts of closed source software offerings.

I don't understand what you are trying to say there.

[John_Spikowski]

What are the chances you could get an enhancement you like into the Python / Raspian distribution?

[Heater]

ScriptBasic,

What are the chances you could get an enhancement you like into the Python / Raspian distribution?

Slim to none of course.

What has that got to do with being Open Source or not?

How is that different than my asking "What are the chances you could get an enhancement you like into VC++ / Windows 10?"

Nothing and none as far as I can tell.

Well, except despite being slim to none there is a lot more chance I could hack Python to do what I want than VC++, what with having the source code available.

[Heater]

Speaking of gluing things together. I just managed to get node.js to complete fibo(4784969) in 2.7 seconds. Twenty one times faster than fibo.js, only 3 times slower than the C++ version!

$ time node fibo_karatsuba.js | head -c 32
10727395641800477229364813596225
real 0m2.768s
user 0m2.609s
sys 0m0.453s

Of course I cheated with the glue a bit...

[John_Spikowski]

Sounds like you use GMP fibo.

[Heater]

Nope. All my own code.

[danjperron]

MacBook-Air-de-Daniel:~ daniel$ ./t1
FFFFFFFF * 80000000 = 7FFFFFFF80000000
That is on your macbook, try it on the RPi and see. C says a mathematical operator only has to return the same type as its operators, the type of variable you are assigning to has no bearing on the types used in the calculation.

Yes you are correct. But When I look at my history I did fix that bug when I was able to print the result!. It just slip on my mind.

I still have to work on my multiplication function which is not effective.

[ejolson]

Speaking of gluing things together. I just managed to get node.js to complete fibo(4784969) in 2.7 seconds. Twenty one times faster than fibo.js, only 3 times slower than the C++ version!

$ time node fibo_karatsuba.js | head -c 32
10727395641800477229364813596225
real 0m2.768s
user 0m2.609s
sys 0m0.453s

Of course I cheated with the glue a bit...

From the name, it would appear you used the Karatsuba algorithm and built-in big numbers for the limbs.

In a completely different direction, there is a programming language called LOLCODE based on the LOLCAT spoken language so simple that it is understandable by any cat, not just orange ones. I stopped short of Karatsuba multiplication and even the doubling formulas with the hope that someone good with cats who frequents this thread might be able to help.

Since LOLCODE is a modern language designed for beginners that meets the same design goals Kurtz and Kemeny had for BASIC in the golden age (and Grace Hopper with COBOL before that), then anyone should be able to understand and improve the program just by reading it. The current version of the code is

Code: Select all

HAI 1.3

OBTW
    HAIFIBO.LOL -- COMPUTE THE NTH FIBONACCI NUMBER
    WRITTEN JUNE 7, 2019 BY ERIC OLSON

    DIS PROGRAM DEMONSTRATEZ TEH EXPRESIVENES OV LOLCODE AS MEASURD
    BY EXPLICITLY CODIN HOOJ-NUMBR ADDISHUN AN USIN TEH RECURRENCE

        F(K+1) = F(K) + F(K-1)

    2 COMPUTE TEH NTH FIBONACCI NUMBR.  4 SIMPLICITY DIS CODE USEZ
    NEITHR KARATSUBA MULTIPLICASHUN, TEH DOUBLIN FORMULA NOR ANY OTHR
    FAST CALCULATIN ALGORITHM.  TEH RUNNIN TIEM IZ O(N^2).

    VERSHUN 2:  FIXD BUG IN PADZERO DAT MITE OVERFLOW IF TEH FULL
    INTEGR WIDTH WUZ USD 4 DA LIMBS AN BUMPD TEH RADIX CUZ 64-BIT 
    INTEGERS R USD EVEN ON RASPBIAN.
TLDR

I HAS A RADIX ITZ 1000000000000000000
I HAS A PADLIMIT ITZ QUOSHUNT OF RADIX AN 10

HOW IZ I PADZERO YR X
    I HAS A Y ITZ X
    IM IN YR PADDIN
        BOTH SAEM PADLIMIT AN SMALLR OF PADLIMIT AN Y, O RLY?
        YA RLY
            VISIBLE X!
            GTFO
        OIC
        VISIBLE "0"!
        Y R PRODUKT OF Y AN 10
    IM OUTTA YR PADDIN
IF U SAY SO

HOW IZ I HOOJPRINT YR HOOJNUM
    I HAS A J
    IM IN YR PRINTIN UPPIN YR INDEX TIL ...
        BOTH SAEM INDEX AN HOOJNUM'Z SRS 0
        J R DIFF OF HOOJNUM'Z SRS 0 AN INDEX
        BOTH SAEM J AN HOOJNUM'Z SRS 0, O RLY?
        YA RLY
            VISIBLE HOOJNUM'Z SRS J!
        NO WAI
            I IZ PADZERO YR HOOJNUM'Z SRS J MKAY
        OIC
    IM OUTTA YR PRINTIN
    VISIBLE ""
IF U SAY SO

HOW IZ I HOOJTRIM YR HOOJNUM
    I HAS A J
    IM IN YR TRIMMIN UPPIN YR INDEX TIL ...
        BOTH SAEM INDEX AN HOOJNUM'Z SRS 0
        J R DIFF OF HOOJNUM'Z SRS 0 AN INDEX
        DIFFRINT HOOJNUM'Z SRS J AN 0, O RLY?
        YA RLY
            HOOJNUM'Z SRS 0 R J
            FOUND YR HOOJNUM
        OIC
    IM OUTTA YR TRIMMIN
    HOOJNUM'Z SRS 0 R 1
IF U SAY SO

HOW IZ I HOOJADD YR X AN YR Y
    I HAS A RETMAX ITZ SUM OF 1 AN BIGGR OF X'Z SRS 0 AN Y'Z SRS 0
    I HAS A RETVAL ITZ A BUKKIT
    RETVAL HAS A SRS 0 ITZ RETMAX
    I HAS A J
    I HAS A TEMP
    I HAS A CARRY ITZ 0
    IM IN YR ADDIN UPPIN YR INDEX TIL BOTH SAEM INDEX AN RETMAX
        J R SUM OF INDEX AN 1
        TEMP R CARRY
        BOTH SAEM J AN SMALLR OF J AN X'Z SRS 0, O RLY?
        YA RLY
            TEMP R SUM OF TEMP AN X'Z SRS J
        OIC
        BOTH SAEM J AN SMALLR OF J AN Y'Z SRS 0, O RLY?
        YA RLY
            TEMP R SUM OF TEMP AN Y'Z SRS J
        OIC
        CARRY R QUOSHUNT OF TEMP AN RADIX
        RETVAL HAS A SRS J ITZ MOD OF TEMP AN RADIX
    IM OUTTA YR ADDIN
    FOUND YR I IZ HOOJTRIM YR RETVAL MKAY
IF U SAY SO

HOW IZ I HOOJFIBO YR N
    I HAS A HOOJA ITZ A BUKKIT
    HOOJA HAS A SRS 0 ITZ 1
    HOOJA HAS A SRS 1 ITZ 1
    DIFFRINT N AN BIGGR OF N AN 3, O RLY?
    YA RLY
        FOUND YR HOOJA
    OIC
    N R DIFF OF N AN 2
    I HAS A HOOJB ITZ A BUKKIT
    I HAS A HOOJC ITZ A BUKKIT
    HOOJB HAS A SRS 0 ITZ 1
    HOOJB HAS A SRS 1 ITZ 1
    IM IN YR FIBOLOOPIN UPPIN YR INDEX TIL BOTH SAEM INDEX AN N
        HOOJC R HOOJB
        HOOJB R HOOJA
        HOOJA R I IZ HOOJADD YR HOOJB AN YR HOOJC MKAY
    IM OUTTA YR FIBOLOOPIN
    FOUND YR HOOJA
IF U SAY SO

I HAS A N
I HAS A INPUT
I HAS A HOOJNUM
IM IN YR COMPUTIN
    VISIBLE "? "!
    GIMMEH INPUT
    N R SUM OF 0 AN INPUT
    BOTH SAEM N AN 0, O RLY?
    YA RLY
        GTFO
    OIC
    HOOJNUM R I IZ HOOJFIBO YR N MKAY
    I IZ HOOJPRINT YR HOOJNUM MKAY
IM OUTTA YR COMPUTIN
    
KTHXBYE

It's not particularly fast, but works. Here is a test run:

Code: Select all

$ lci haifibo.lol
? 1
1
? 6
8
? 100
354224848179261915075
? 200
280571172992510140037611932413038677189525
? 500
139423224561697880139724382870407283950070256587697307264108962948325571622863290691557658876222521294125
? 1000
43466557686937456435688527675040625802564660517371780402481729089536555417949051890403879840079255169295922593080322634775209689623239873322471161642996440906533187938298969649928516003704476137795166849228875
? 7499
7060398799376784390080431403153762407133523390537059878104950622786388718825722561078363937111808052845829043934364899297524579596771135537480100208027085369896805936602227218581761602607709602334939889484798397142942218388978326231083561149392205369863825989576207551146164545991161518248812602059748659792822539047900440615827674362997814592886203623387177745482781961764037789256204211876516867755389327862471098927207504535260828110167596703760822462988717005213704260555517262693067390672579278642451139772159098237484766060153417966500228867893493613281899397919811817985526393984078448175231602116343732669535382592866176830021901276573501388490142960269573429689010342153684955910446206097236075006861770107503447313897585687337597851533416564601034740128818628864559166341653871747561460183576425048959152474006524376867108154719826724951577811058520409795890271953207501037389580837065627491303664939319008074326639606500449899956261137209763009997639133968161102379352100526521219319009668949360509017190305822205735637047582596844361054536570105575658758958126781615314786897307911885991922151961963946513621905753392384260111071739837465056829372023129875545405507382500246527434315392215299304419577933704415638169229147761482551989210536522219106497198930639764648714287173928443999657477934962619150591299808484015221733892947047898044789624388717645430081789847014505889073245674298227489060602274996337440845903140973613284173331051297305566669585112157848209843391912656796627677634633934542271164812214908073040748492419868112329633702241675255001
? 0

Update: Since lci uses 64-bit integers even on Raspbian, better performance (about two times faster) was obtained by increasing the radix and modifying the padzero routine to avoid an overflow bug when using such a large radix.

[Heater]

ejolson,

From the name, it would appear you used the Karatsuba algorithm and built-in big numbers for the limbs.

Yes. And no.

More later when I get it running how I like.

In a completely different direction, there is a programming language called LOLCODE...

OMG. WTF?

You have out LOL'ed us all!

The 20000th HOOJFIBO comes out correct after one minute here.

I find a certain poetic charm in "HOW IZ I HOOJFIBO YR N". Don't you?

[ejolson]

The 20000th HOOJFIBO comes out correct after one minute here.

I find a certain poetic charm in "HOW IZ I HOOJFIBO YR N". Don't you?

I just discovered that lci uses 64-bit integers even on Raspbian, so I was able to increase the size of the radix. The padzero function was also modified slightly to further increase each limb by one more decimal digit. The post above has been updated with the new version. I suspect this micro-optimization will increase the speed by about double what is was before.

What would e e cummings think if all poetry were written using only upper-case letters as in LOLCAT and LOLCODE?

[ejolson]

I suspect this micro-optimization will increase the speed by about double what is was before.

With further optimization a program written in LOLCODE may soon be the performance champion in the famous Fibonacci challenge.

High-performance extensions to the poetic cat-friendly meme-based programming language described in this research entitled "I CAN HAS SUPERCOMPUTER?" have resulted in an ideal way to teach parallel and distributed computing. More information is available here.

Source for an advanced optimising compiler that includeds the necessary LOLCODE parallel programming extensions along with example code is available on GitHub. Apparently the compiler has been tested on the Parallela many-core Epiphany coprocessor, Intel x86 PCs as well as a Cray XC40. Since Raspbian is surprisingly similar to the targeted Linux operating systems, it is likely lcc will also run on the Raspberry Pi 3B+.

If LOLCODE is the most expressive language developed so far for teaching parallel processing, is there any hope of avoiding a digital apocalypse?

[John_Spikowski]

If you have a way that would allow ScriptBasic to do Fibonacci in hardware native math, I would like to try it with the SBT extension module in asynchronous threads using a shared result string. That would be an interesting spin on this challenge.

[Heater]

ScriptBasic,

What do you mean by "hardware native math". Generally the hardware, computers we have, do arithmetic in various sizes of signed and unsigned integers and IEEE 754 standard floating point. With perhaps some help with accelerating operations on vectors of those things. Presumably ScriptBasic uses some or all of those.

I don't know if any one has ever built a hardware fibonacci calculator. But as I have an FPGA board here you start me thinking...

[ejolson]

If you have a way that would allow ScriptBasic to do Fibonacci in hardware native math, I would like to try it with the SBT extension module in asynchronous threads using a shared result string. That would be an interesting spin on this challenge.

The parallelism exhibited in the C and C++ codes is from the divide-and-conquer big-number multiplication routine. Coding this using native integer data types requires a reasonably efficient way to reference memory through an index. However, as has (or will be) demonstrated in JavaScript, it's also possible to layer Karatsuba multiplication on top of an existing implementation of big-number arithmetic (maybe).

While the JavaScript code does this to work around a bug in how fast the existing big-number printing routines are, this layering approach could also be used to create a parallel multiplication algorithm. To do this in ScriptBasic, you would need a way to use the GMP multiply, add, subtract, modulo and divide routines from within a script. After this, it would likely be possible to layer a parallel implementation of Karatsuba on top of GMP using ScriptBasic threads.

[ejolson]

I don't know if any one has ever built a hardware fibonacci calculator. But as I have an FPGA board here you start me thinking...

The double-dabble base-2 to base-10 conversion routines from the Fibonacci code in this post were apparently designed for hardware implementation. I wonder if there are big-number multiply routines that have been designed to specifically make use of the kinds of parallelism present in an FPGA.

The entries for the next roundup in the Fibonacci challenge are presently

fibo_phi.py -- A numerical approach based on taking powers of the golden ratio using floating-point numbers with greater than one-million-digit precision.

golden.pas -- An O(n^2) algebraic approach based on taking powers of the golden ratio using schoolbook multiplication.

haifibo.lol -- A simple O(n^2) dynamic-programming approach that uses repeated additions.

From what I understand new PL/I and C codes are still under preparation. Is there anything else?

[Heater]

ejolson,

High-performance extensions to the poetic cat-friendly meme-based programming language described in this research entitled "I CAN HAS SUPERCOMPUTER?"...

FO SHIZZLE, MA NIZZLE!

That is outstanding. And somebody said the LOLCODE thread was "nonsense".

Checking the motivation for the LOLCODE super computing project I feel that Kurtz and Kemeny and would totally approve.

Sadly I don't have a Cray XC40 lying around but strangely enough I do have a Parallela Epiphany board on my desk at this very moment. Every now and then I dig it out of the junk pile and wonder what to do with it. Now I have a plan...

Also sadly the lci LOLCODE compiler did not like my fibo code much:

a) Multi-line comments can't start on the same line as there OBTW.

b) I had to pull some of the sub-expressions out of nested expressions to get it to understand.

c) Had to add types to the variables to get the generated C code to compile.

d) Had to add MKAY to the end of the fibo function declaration.

I ended up with this lci friendly fibo:

Code: Select all

HAI 1.2
    BTW Heater's first LOLCODE for lci

    OBTW
        Function to calculate the n'th Fibonacci number
        The recursive way.
    TLDR

    HOW IZ I fibo YR n MKAY
        BOTH SAEM n AN 0
        O RLY?
        YA RLY
            FOUND YR 0
        OIC

        BOTH SAEM n AN 1
        O RLY?
        YA RLY
            FOUND YR 1
        OIC

        I HAS A d1 ITZ A NUMBR AN ITZ DIFF OF n AN 1 
        I HAS A d2 ITZ A NUMBR AN ITZ DIFF OF n AN 2 

        I HAS A f1 ITZ A NUMBR AN ITZ I IZ fibo YR d1 MKAY 
        I HAS A f2 ITZ A NUMBR AN ITZ I IZ fibo YR d2 MKAY

        FOUND YR SUM OF f1 AN f2
    IF U SAY SO

    I HAS A n ITZ A NUMBR AN ITZ 20
    I HAS A f ITZ A NUMBR
    f R I IZ fibo YR 20 MKAY
    VISIBLE "fibo("n") = "f

KTHXBYE