LSL does not store all the current approximated digits of pi, nor can it calculate it on its own due to memory limitations, therefore LSL cannot count pi's digits. Therefore Xoza's answer is invalid, although I'm sure he was just making a funny. As a side note: The elegant way to express pi: C/(2*r) = π Despite Xoza's response to Eriksson's inquiry being invalid, Xoza's method of expressing pi is inherently better than a "trillion approximation (as Ethan describes)." Calling PI in LSL probably initiates an infinite series summation that approaches the above formula, which will terminate at an unspecified, high amount of digits. This high amount of digits is a truncated version of any "trillion" pi decimal approximation which in all human purposes is the same-- and takes far less time.