Talk:Juggler sequence: Difference between revisions

From Rosetta Code
Content added Content deleted
(Created talk page.)
 
(changed section header HTML tags, added a new discussion/talk topic.)
Line 1: Line 1:
===Bigger values of 'n' to try===
== Bigger values of 'n' to try ==


Looks like this task is too easy on modern hardware for those with access to GMP.
Looks like this task is too easy on modern hardware for those with access to GMP.
Line 8: Line 8:


Regrettably, Harry Smith who did much early work on the subject has now passed away. --[[User:PureFox|PureFox]] ([[User talk:PureFox|talk]]) 18:49, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
Regrettably, Harry Smith who did much early work on the subject has now passed away. --[[User:PureFox|PureFox]] ([[User talk:PureFox|talk]]) 18:49, 18 August 2021 (UTC)


== talk about a very delayed ''déjà vu'' ==
It wasn't after I backed up (archived) my   '''juggler'''   REXX program for this (draft) task   (to my archive/backup hard drive)   that I discovered a copy of my (draft) task for the this sequence   (I had put it aside for some reason,   and then forgot about it).   The old draft was created in March, 2016.   Oh well.   Not the first time, and it won't be the last, either.     -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger|Gerard Schildberger]] ([[User talk:Gerard Schildberger|talk]]) 22:54, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

Revision as of 22:56, 18 August 2021

Bigger values of 'n' to try

Looks like this task is too easy on modern hardware for those with access to GMP.

I've found a more up to date link with some even bigger numbers for those who want to extend their solution.

The value of h[n] for the biggest of these (n = 1,247,677,915) has more than 3.2 billion digits!

Regrettably, Harry Smith who did much early work on the subject has now passed away. --PureFox (talk) 18:49, 18 August 2021 (UTC)


talk about a very delayed déjà vu

It wasn't after I backed up (archived) my   juggler   REXX program for this (draft) task   (to my archive/backup hard drive)   that I discovered a copy of my (draft) task for the this sequence   (I had put it aside for some reason,   and then forgot about it).   The old draft was created in March, 2016.   Oh well.   Not the first time, and it won't be the last, either.     -- Gerard Schildberger (talk) 22:54, 18 August 2021 (UTC)