From: james.harris.1@nospicedham.gmail.com   
      
   On 07/12/2017 10:15, Terje Mathisen wrote:   
   > Rod Pemberton wrote:   
   >> On Wed, 06 Dec 2017 11:24:17 GMT aen@nospicedham.spamtrap.com wrote:   
   >>   
   >>> [snip]   
   >>>   
   >>> Especially do I assume the maximum number correct? [snip]   
   >>   
   >> What maximum number?  What are you asking?   
   >>   
   >> Are you asking if another 64-bit palindromic number in decimal, say   
   >> 9876543210123456789, is larger than 1234567890987654321?  If so,   
   >> that's obvious.  Wouldn't the largest 64-bit palindromic number be   
   >> 9999999999999999999?  Or, are you asking something else? ...   
   >   
   > The largest number is of course what you get by taking the maximum   
   > 64-bit unsigned value (18446744073709551615) which is 2^64 - 1.   
   >   
   > This is a 20-digit number so you just take the first 10 digits and   
   > reverse them in order to get the largest possible 64-bit base-10   
   > palindrome: 1844674407 7044764481   
      
   Maybe I misunderstand the requirement but if the palindrome is expected   
   to fit in 64 bits wouldn't the one you mention be too large (because it   
   is followed by a lower digit, 3, in the original? Perhaps the first   
   part's trailing 7 could be reduced to a 6.   
      
      1844674406 6044764481   
      
   --   
   James Harris   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)