How come in this code to find prime numbers, is_prime(9) returns True?









up vote
1
down vote

favorite












def is_prime(x):
if x < 2:
return False
else:
for n in range(2, x):
if x % n == 0:
return False
else:
return True


print is_prime(9) returns True instead of False.



I don't quite understand.



The range (2,9) includes this list: 2,3,4,5,6,7,8



and 9 % 3 == 0,
So how come I do not get False as the answer of that function?










share|improve this question



















  • 3




    The else: return True should have one level of indent less (yes, you read that right). Also you should run the loop from range(2, int(x ** .5))
    – coldspeed
    Nov 11 at 1:09











  • Because your loop only executes once, for 9 % 2.
    – Tieson T.
    Nov 11 at 1:11














up vote
1
down vote

favorite












def is_prime(x):
if x < 2:
return False
else:
for n in range(2, x):
if x % n == 0:
return False
else:
return True


print is_prime(9) returns True instead of False.



I don't quite understand.



The range (2,9) includes this list: 2,3,4,5,6,7,8



and 9 % 3 == 0,
So how come I do not get False as the answer of that function?










share|improve this question



















  • 3




    The else: return True should have one level of indent less (yes, you read that right). Also you should run the loop from range(2, int(x ** .5))
    – coldspeed
    Nov 11 at 1:09











  • Because your loop only executes once, for 9 % 2.
    – Tieson T.
    Nov 11 at 1:11












up vote
1
down vote

favorite









up vote
1
down vote

favorite











def is_prime(x):
if x < 2:
return False
else:
for n in range(2, x):
if x % n == 0:
return False
else:
return True


print is_prime(9) returns True instead of False.



I don't quite understand.



The range (2,9) includes this list: 2,3,4,5,6,7,8



and 9 % 3 == 0,
So how come I do not get False as the answer of that function?










share|improve this question















def is_prime(x):
if x < 2:
return False
else:
for n in range(2, x):
if x % n == 0:
return False
else:
return True


print is_prime(9) returns True instead of False.



I don't quite understand.



The range (2,9) includes this list: 2,3,4,5,6,7,8



and 9 % 3 == 0,
So how come I do not get False as the answer of that function?







python primes






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited Nov 11 at 1:59









martineau

64.7k887172




64.7k887172










asked Nov 11 at 1:08









FNM

82




82







  • 3




    The else: return True should have one level of indent less (yes, you read that right). Also you should run the loop from range(2, int(x ** .5))
    – coldspeed
    Nov 11 at 1:09











  • Because your loop only executes once, for 9 % 2.
    – Tieson T.
    Nov 11 at 1:11












  • 3




    The else: return True should have one level of indent less (yes, you read that right). Also you should run the loop from range(2, int(x ** .5))
    – coldspeed
    Nov 11 at 1:09











  • Because your loop only executes once, for 9 % 2.
    – Tieson T.
    Nov 11 at 1:11







3




3




The else: return True should have one level of indent less (yes, you read that right). Also you should run the loop from range(2, int(x ** .5))
– coldspeed
Nov 11 at 1:09





The else: return True should have one level of indent less (yes, you read that right). Also you should run the loop from range(2, int(x ** .5))
– coldspeed
Nov 11 at 1:09













Because your loop only executes once, for 9 % 2.
– Tieson T.
Nov 11 at 1:11




Because your loop only executes once, for 9 % 2.
– Tieson T.
Nov 11 at 1:11












2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes

















up vote
0
down vote



accepted










This is because you don't actually loop, as you return True during the first cycle (9 % 2 == 0 is False).



Something like this should solve the problem:



def is_prime(x):
if x < 2:
return False
for n in range(2, x):
if x % n == 0:
return False
return True





share|improve this answer



























    up vote
    1
    down vote













    You can simplify the logic a good amount by keeping your original loop and not exiting early. You can add your first conditional to your final return:



    def is_prime(x):
    for n in range(2, x):
    if x % n == 0:
    return False

    return x > 2


    BTW, the Sieve of Erastothenes is a pretty cool method of solving this problem in a much better run time complexity. Here's a link to a brief explanation:



    https://math.stackexchange.com/questions/58799/why-in-sieve-of-erastothenes-of-n-number-you-need-to-check-and-cross-out-numbe






    share|improve this answer






















    • With this code, negative numbers, 0 and 1 will be considered as prime whereas they aren't
      – mistiru
      Nov 11 at 1:18











    • Great point, I made the terrible assumption the caller would take that into consideration. Added a fix.
      – LeKhan9
      Nov 11 at 1:26










    Your Answer






    StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function ()
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function ()
    StackExchange.snippets.init();
    );
    );
    , "code-snippets");

    StackExchange.ready(function()
    var channelOptions =
    tags: "".split(" "),
    id: "1"
    ;
    initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
    // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
    if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
    createEditor();
    );

    else
    createEditor();

    );

    function createEditor()
    StackExchange.prepareEditor(
    heartbeatType: 'answer',
    convertImagesToLinks: true,
    noModals: true,
    showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
    reputationToPostImages: 10,
    bindNavPrevention: true,
    postfix: "",
    imageUploader:
    brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
    contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
    allowUrls: true
    ,
    onDemand: true,
    discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
    ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
    );



    );













     

    draft saved


    draft discarded


















    StackExchange.ready(
    function ()
    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f53244958%2fhow-come-in-this-code-to-find-prime-numbers-is-prime9-returns-true%23new-answer', 'question_page');

    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown

























    2 Answers
    2






    active

    oldest

    votes








    2 Answers
    2






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes








    up vote
    0
    down vote



    accepted










    This is because you don't actually loop, as you return True during the first cycle (9 % 2 == 0 is False).



    Something like this should solve the problem:



    def is_prime(x):
    if x < 2:
    return False
    for n in range(2, x):
    if x % n == 0:
    return False
    return True





    share|improve this answer
























      up vote
      0
      down vote



      accepted










      This is because you don't actually loop, as you return True during the first cycle (9 % 2 == 0 is False).



      Something like this should solve the problem:



      def is_prime(x):
      if x < 2:
      return False
      for n in range(2, x):
      if x % n == 0:
      return False
      return True





      share|improve this answer






















        up vote
        0
        down vote



        accepted







        up vote
        0
        down vote



        accepted






        This is because you don't actually loop, as you return True during the first cycle (9 % 2 == 0 is False).



        Something like this should solve the problem:



        def is_prime(x):
        if x < 2:
        return False
        for n in range(2, x):
        if x % n == 0:
        return False
        return True





        share|improve this answer












        This is because you don't actually loop, as you return True during the first cycle (9 % 2 == 0 is False).



        Something like this should solve the problem:



        def is_prime(x):
        if x < 2:
        return False
        for n in range(2, x):
        if x % n == 0:
        return False
        return True






        share|improve this answer












        share|improve this answer



        share|improve this answer










        answered Nov 11 at 1:11









        mistiru

        40012




        40012






















            up vote
            1
            down vote













            You can simplify the logic a good amount by keeping your original loop and not exiting early. You can add your first conditional to your final return:



            def is_prime(x):
            for n in range(2, x):
            if x % n == 0:
            return False

            return x > 2


            BTW, the Sieve of Erastothenes is a pretty cool method of solving this problem in a much better run time complexity. Here's a link to a brief explanation:



            https://math.stackexchange.com/questions/58799/why-in-sieve-of-erastothenes-of-n-number-you-need-to-check-and-cross-out-numbe






            share|improve this answer






















            • With this code, negative numbers, 0 and 1 will be considered as prime whereas they aren't
              – mistiru
              Nov 11 at 1:18











            • Great point, I made the terrible assumption the caller would take that into consideration. Added a fix.
              – LeKhan9
              Nov 11 at 1:26














            up vote
            1
            down vote













            You can simplify the logic a good amount by keeping your original loop and not exiting early. You can add your first conditional to your final return:



            def is_prime(x):
            for n in range(2, x):
            if x % n == 0:
            return False

            return x > 2


            BTW, the Sieve of Erastothenes is a pretty cool method of solving this problem in a much better run time complexity. Here's a link to a brief explanation:



            https://math.stackexchange.com/questions/58799/why-in-sieve-of-erastothenes-of-n-number-you-need-to-check-and-cross-out-numbe






            share|improve this answer






















            • With this code, negative numbers, 0 and 1 will be considered as prime whereas they aren't
              – mistiru
              Nov 11 at 1:18











            • Great point, I made the terrible assumption the caller would take that into consideration. Added a fix.
              – LeKhan9
              Nov 11 at 1:26












            up vote
            1
            down vote










            up vote
            1
            down vote









            You can simplify the logic a good amount by keeping your original loop and not exiting early. You can add your first conditional to your final return:



            def is_prime(x):
            for n in range(2, x):
            if x % n == 0:
            return False

            return x > 2


            BTW, the Sieve of Erastothenes is a pretty cool method of solving this problem in a much better run time complexity. Here's a link to a brief explanation:



            https://math.stackexchange.com/questions/58799/why-in-sieve-of-erastothenes-of-n-number-you-need-to-check-and-cross-out-numbe






            share|improve this answer














            You can simplify the logic a good amount by keeping your original loop and not exiting early. You can add your first conditional to your final return:



            def is_prime(x):
            for n in range(2, x):
            if x % n == 0:
            return False

            return x > 2


            BTW, the Sieve of Erastothenes is a pretty cool method of solving this problem in a much better run time complexity. Here's a link to a brief explanation:



            https://math.stackexchange.com/questions/58799/why-in-sieve-of-erastothenes-of-n-number-you-need-to-check-and-cross-out-numbe







            share|improve this answer














            share|improve this answer



            share|improve this answer








            edited Nov 11 at 1:26

























            answered Nov 11 at 1:15









            LeKhan9

            911111




            911111











            • With this code, negative numbers, 0 and 1 will be considered as prime whereas they aren't
              – mistiru
              Nov 11 at 1:18











            • Great point, I made the terrible assumption the caller would take that into consideration. Added a fix.
              – LeKhan9
              Nov 11 at 1:26
















            • With this code, negative numbers, 0 and 1 will be considered as prime whereas they aren't
              – mistiru
              Nov 11 at 1:18











            • Great point, I made the terrible assumption the caller would take that into consideration. Added a fix.
              – LeKhan9
              Nov 11 at 1:26















            With this code, negative numbers, 0 and 1 will be considered as prime whereas they aren't
            – mistiru
            Nov 11 at 1:18





            With this code, negative numbers, 0 and 1 will be considered as prime whereas they aren't
            – mistiru
            Nov 11 at 1:18













            Great point, I made the terrible assumption the caller would take that into consideration. Added a fix.
            – LeKhan9
            Nov 11 at 1:26




            Great point, I made the terrible assumption the caller would take that into consideration. Added a fix.
            – LeKhan9
            Nov 11 at 1:26

















             

            draft saved


            draft discarded















































             


            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function ()
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f53244958%2fhow-come-in-this-code-to-find-prime-numbers-is-prime9-returns-true%23new-answer', 'question_page');

            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown





















































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown

































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown







            這個網誌中的熱門文章

            How to read a connectionString WITH PROVIDER in .NET Core?

            In R, how to develop a multiplot heatmap.2 figure showing key labels successfully

            Museum of Modern and Contemporary Art of Trento and Rovereto