Anonymous user
Talk:Miller–Rabin primality test: Difference between revisions
→The pseudo-code from Wikipedia is [allegedly] broken
(→The pseudo-code from Wikipedia is [allegedly] broken: Not broken.) |
|||
Line 55:
: The pseudocode is not broken. The Run Basic code is broken. It does not choose the bases correctly, and inverts the x=1 or x=n-1 test. [[User:Danaj|Danaj]] ([[User talk:Danaj|talk]]) 17:17, 11 March 2016 (UTC)
:: Thanks that seems to have fixed Run Basic, I've tried quite a few different numbers and it seems to be correct. I noticed PureBasic was doing almost exactly the same thing and from looking at the pseudocode I thought it was wrong. I wonder how these two Basic languages produced similar errors, maybe someone copied and didn't check the output.
| |||