Heh - I must admit I was testing it on relatively small primes - With what Joel sent in I'll have a bit of a redefine. The project only involves lower order primes currently but with larger primes my original equation is definitely slow :)
James. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tom Conlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2001 8:28 AM Subject: [REBOL] Re: Speed testing prime functions.. > > Hi James, > > seemed slower... hmmm, on what size number? > how about running them both on... say 1073741789 > > you might want to run the other one first :) > > > > > On Thu, 29 Nov 2001, James Marsden wrote: > > > Hi to all the prime lovers out there :) > > > > Could someone give me some feedback on the fastest way to implement prime > > checks in Rebol - > > > > Currently I use: > > > > prime?: func [p /local c v][ > > v: true > > for c 2 (p - 1) 1 [ > > if p // c = 0 [v: false break] > > ] > > v > > ] > > > > Is there a better way to do this? I have seen another implementation but > > that was about 60 or so lines and seemed slower... > > > > > > James. > > > > -- > > To unsubscribe from this list, please send an email to > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe" in the > > subject, without the quotes. > > > > -- > To unsubscribe from this list, please send an email to > [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe" in the > subject, without the quotes. > -- To unsubscribe from this list, please send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe" in the subject, without the quotes.
