7 replaced http://mathematica.stackexchange.com/ with https://mathematica.stackexchange.com/
source | link

Exp@*Total@*Log have a big advantage: it doesn't go to underflow or overflow if you work with a wide range of numbers (numbers should be positive, see Steve's answeranswer).

Exp@*Total@*Log have a big advantage: it doesn't go to underflow or overflow if you work with a wide range of numbers (numbers should be positive, see Steve's answer).

Exp@*Total@*Log have a big advantage: it doesn't go to underflow or overflow if you work with a wide range of numbers (numbers should be positive, see Steve's answer).

6 added 102 characters in body
source | link

Exp@*Total@*Log have a big advantage: it doesn't go to underflow or overflow if you work with a wide range of numbers (numbers should be positive, see Steve's answer).

Exp@*Total@*Log have a big advantage: it doesn't go to underflow or overflow if you work with a wide range of numbers.

Exp@*Total@*Log have a big advantage: it doesn't go to underflow or overflow if you work with a wide range of numbers (numbers should be positive, see Steve's answer).

5 Add the standard way at the top because other questions are being marked as a duplicate of this one. Too many ways is confusing for beginners.
source | link

The usual way to multiply all elements of a list is Times @@ list.


The less trivial problem is to calculate the product as fast as possible. Some performance tests (from slowest to fastest):

The less trivial problem is to calculate the product as fast as possible. Some performance tests (from slowest to fastest):

The usual way to multiply all elements of a list is Times @@ list.


The less trivial problem is to calculate the product as fast as possible. Some performance tests (from slowest to fastest):

4 deleted 27 characters in body
source | link
3 added 1277 characters in body
source | link
2 added 94 characters in body
source | link
1
source | link