Please, recheck your code. It should output these numbers:
`1 2 3 5 8 13 21 34 55 89 144 233 377 610 987 1597 ...
i.e.:
perl -e '$.++;print$}+=$.,q| |,$.+=$},q| |while+1'|more
`
| [reply] [d/l] |

Which part are you criticizing? I thought fibo numbers where 1,1,2,3,5,8 which would make his correct. Just asking for clarification if there was some other difference i missed.
His outputs 1,1,2,3,5,8,13,21,34,55,89,144,233,377,610,987,1597 for me.
Update: /me does some googling and finds both of those and 0,1,1,2,3 as pretty evenly distributed....hmm.
| [reply] |

It's all just convention, but I opt for 0,1,1,2,3,5,...,
and I have a reason.
If you define F_0 = 0, F_1 = 1,
than the nice equation
gcd(F_n, F_k) = F_{gcd(n,k)} is true,
and as a special case F_k divides F_n iff k divides n.
This nice equation would be much more ugly if F_0 != 0.
~~Update: in case anyone's interested, any integer
sequence defined
by a second order homogenous linear recursion and
starting element 0 has this property. That is, if
s_0 = 0, s_1 is and integer, and s_{k+2} = A s_{k+1} + B s_k
for given A, B integers; then
gcd(s_n, s_k) = s_{gcd(n,k)}.~~
Update 2006 nov 4: the above paragraph is false. Sorry.
| [reply] |

This was not the case before the update of cristian
while the code length was 27 chars.
| [reply] |

Comment onRe: Fibonacci numbers (again)DownloadCode