how do u even do this?

me too

I found some algorithm paper about how to make a sqrt().that's awesome O(1) algorithm.

I've got the same issue, is that impossible then to resolve that problem ? I could not understand how to fix that unsupported type problem.

Nice use of the properties of the divisions, Euclides would be proud of you guys. Simply and clever.

This solution made me a fool

Yes, but once the square is found, it returns => breaks out of the loop.

That would take long to compute for bigger numbers, no?

Approved

This is not clever, it's best practice. Don't be fooled by the strange votes.

Merge conflict. The solution in the tests should better be static. (And div is after mul, so there was no problem.)

static

div

mul

Should all be appropriately fixed.

The number will always be a positive integer greater than 0.

And edx is uninitialized in the solution. ebx isn't saved in the solution.

edx

ebx

Apparently has description conflicts, I couldn't see any but I tried forking this nonetheless.

LGTM

how do u even do this?

me too

I found some algorithm paper about how to make a sqrt().that's awesome O(1) algorithm.

I've got the same issue, is that impossible then to resolve that problem ?

I could not understand how to fix that unsupported type problem.

Nice use of the properties of the divisions, Euclides would be proud of you guys. Simply and clever.

This solution made me a fool

Yes, but once the square is found, it returns => breaks out of the loop.

That would take long to compute for bigger numbers, no?

Approved

This is not clever, it's best practice. Don't be fooled by the strange votes.

Merge conflict.

The solution in the tests should better be

`static`

.(And

`div`

is after`mul`

, so there was no problem.)Should all be appropriately fixed.

And

`edx`

is uninitialized in the solution.`ebx`

isn't saved in the solution.Apparently has description conflicts, I couldn't see any but I tried forking this nonetheless.

LGTM

## Loading more items...