Hi,
At 05:19 AM 10/25/99 +0200, Robert van der Peijl wrote:
Why is there a difference in iteration time between the LL test and a
double test.
There isn't - other than double-checking is working on smaller exponents.
For the same FFT-size, the double checking code has to perform a bit
extra
- Original Message -
From: Bob Margulies [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 1999 9:15 AM
Subject: Mersenne: More Schlag
In reading the numerous postings about Liouville numbers and patterned
transcendentals, I notice that there has been a careful
mprime v19 sep23 version:
Factoring M8632699 to 2^64 is 92.2286% complete. 5.531 sec. (3042241006 clocks)
Factoring M8632699 to 2^64 is 92.2378% complete. 5.532 sec. (3042454084 clocks)
mprime v19 oct3 version:
Factoring M8632699 to 2^64 is 92.2476% complete. 15.946 sec. (8770110717 clocks)
I have 256 MB of memory (about 30 gig of hard drive space).
Will this process assist me?
At 07:23 PM 10/25/99 +0100, you wrote:
On 24 Oct 99, at 18:23, Bruce A Metcalf wrote:
Hello, I must have missed the discussion of ReCache the last time around.
Would someone be willing to explain where
Hi all,
This was just reported to me. Others may find it useful.
Regards,
George
I took the liberty of looking at this. It appears that even w/ "gcc
-static", the new glibc name resolution stuff contains explicit uses of
several dynamic libraries. If these libraries aren't present,
