Talk:Multi-base primes: Difference between revisions
Content added Content deleted
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
Hindsight is a wonderful thing. After translating the Rust entry, I am a bit concerned it is skipping a few things it should perhaps not. |
Hindsight is a wonderful thing. After translating the Rust entry, I am a bit concerned it is skipping a few things it should perhaps not. |
||
Who's to say, for instance, that "ABCDEF" won't be prime in 36-16=20 bases? My translation, at least, is not checking that. --[[User:Petelomax|Pete Lomax]] ([[User talk:Petelomax|talk]]) 12:13, 3 July 2021 (UTC) |
Who's to say, for instance, that "ABCDEF" won't be prime in 36-16=20 bases? My translation, at least, is not checking that. --[[User:Petelomax|Pete Lomax]] ([[User talk:Petelomax|talk]]) 12:13, 3 July 2021 (UTC) |
||
:ABCDE0 is divisible by base in any base. Adding F (15) in a base greater than 16 will result in a number ending in 5 in base 10, so ABCDEF can not be prime in any base.--[[User:Nigel Galloway|Nigel Galloway]] ([[User talk:Nigel Galloway|talk]]) 15:49, 3 July 2021 (UTC) |
|||
Revision as of 16:16, 3 July 2021
inadequate range checking?
Hindsight is a wonderful thing. After translating the Rust entry, I am a bit concerned it is skipping a few things it should perhaps not. Who's to say, for instance, that "ABCDEF" won't be prime in 36-16=20 bases? My translation, at least, is not checking that. --Pete Lomax (talk) 12:13, 3 July 2021 (UTC)