Torbjorn Granlund writes:
> For a prospective mpn_rootexact, I assume the time will decrease with k,
> given an n-bit input argument. Right?
I think so. Not sure if it's going to be completely monotone, though.
> if we consider the problem of identifying perfect powers, I'd expect
> arguments
ni...@lysator.liu.se (Niels Möller) writes:
Nothing deep. It make sense that for small k (k'th root), it's a
constant factor slower than binvert. And for large k, time should grow
in the same way as powlo time grows with the bitsize of the exponent.
For a prospective mpn_rootexact, I assu
Torbjorn Granlund writes:
> Do you have any interpretation of these numbers?
Nothing deep. It make sense that for small k (k'th root), it's a
constant factor slower than binvert. And for large k, time should grow
in the same way as powlo time grows with the bitsize of the exponent.
> It does ma
ni...@lysator.liu.se (Niels Möller) writes:
ni...@lysator.liu.se (Niels Möller) writes:
> 0. Support in speed, for benchmarking.
Not checked in yet, but here are some benchmark numbers, comparing to
binvert:
Do you have any interpretation of these numbers?
I am hacking out the ex
ni...@lysator.liu.se (Niels Möller) writes:
> 0. Support in speed, for benchmarking.
Not checked in yet, but here are some benchmark numbers, comparing to
binvert:
$ ./speed -s 1-50 -r mpn_binvert mpn_broot.3 mpn_broot.5 mpn_broot.0x
overhead 0.8 secs, precision 1 units of 1.
