> >We could wait around 2 years to finally get around to testing this
> >obviously
> >abandoned one, or I'll just do it now.
>
> How about another option Aaron? You touch anyone's
> exponents...especially mine and I report you to the FBI for stealing?
> DAMNIT....I sure as hell hope the above message was in jest. You
> better not play around with my exponents (or anyone else's for that
> matter) or I'll raise hell on this list.
Wow! Well, I wasn't kidding, I did grab some exponents and am testing them.
I guess you'll have to call the FBI?
Obviously, opinions on this matter are VERY extreme!
As for you Ashton, which of those numbers in my message belonged to you?
Are you still testing it and, if so, why no updates in over a year?
Let me know and I'll leave you at it, but for goodness sake, if you have a
machine that slow, please consider factoring or double-checking smaller
exponents. It's just as important to do those tests and a slower machine is
much better suited. I don't use a hammer to cut wood, I don't use a
screwdriver to paint my walls, and I don't use a pocket calculator to do FFT
work, but for adding 2+2, it's just fine. Get the drift? Certain tools are
better suited to certain jobs. Find the job that your slower computer is
best suited for and go for it.
Am I just wrong in thinking this?
Aaron
________________________________________________________________
Unsubscribe & list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm
