Anonymous user
Talk:Prime conspiracy: Difference between revisions
Undo revision 223781 by Gerard Schildberger (talk)
m (→numbers in the example for the task: elided part of the output that wasn't supposed to be displayed.) |
(Undo revision 223781 by Gerard Schildberger (talk)) |
||
Line 1:
===numbers in the example for the task===
Nevermind, I found the problem (had to do with the calculation of the upper bound for the sieve). -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger|Gerard Schildberger]] ([[User talk:Gerard Schildberger|talk]]) 23:42, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
<strike>
For 10,000 primes (as shown by the example in the Rosetta Code task), my numbers (using the REXX program) don't match those shown:
<pre>
For 10000 primes used in this study:
and took 0.11 seconds.
H= 80000
prime 10001 is: 84327
digit 1 ──► 1 has a count of: 281, frequency of: 2.81%.
Line 26 ⟶ 33:
</pre>
Does anyone else match either set of numbers for 10,000 primes? -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger|Gerard Schildberger]] ([[User talk:Gerard Schildberger|talk]]) 22:32, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
</strike>
I get a different result. Also, prime 10001 is 104759. Prime 8220 is 84327. Prime 0 is 2. So that's probably your issue. --[[User:Rdm|Rdm]] ([[User talk:Rdm|talk]]) 22:42, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
| |||