Talk:CalmoSoft primes: Difference between revisions

Content added Content deleted

Inline

Revision as of 10:29, 9 April 2023 (view source) PureFox (talk \| contribs) (→‎Raku incorrect: Replied to Pete.) ← Older edit		Revision as of 10:53, 9 April 2023 (view source) Tigerofdarkness (talk \| contribs) (→‎Raku incorrect: Also agree the 250 prime sequence result) Newer edit →
Line 16:		Line 16:

	:I agree with your result for primes < 250 and also disagree with some of the other Raku results. Your 2 second target for the stretch goal may be a bit ambitious for the interpreted languages as it takes Wren 2.6 seconds to sieve for primes up to 50 million before even starting to figure out the longest CalmoSoft prime sequence! --[[User:PureFox\|PureFox]] ([[User talk:PureFox\|talk]]) 10:29, 9 April 2023 (UTC)		:I agree with your result for primes < 250 and also disagree with some of the other Raku results. Your 2 second target for the stretch goal may be a bit ambitious for the interpreted languages as it takes Wren 2.6 seconds to sieve for primes up to 50 million before even starting to figure out the longest CalmoSoft prime sequence! --[[User:PureFox\|PureFox]] ([[User talk:PureFox\|talk]]) 10:29, 9 April 2023 (UTC)

			::I also agree your 250 prime result. I also agree that interpreted languages may struggle to do it in 2 seconds. See the notes on the Algol 68 stretch sample. --[[User:Tigerofdarkness\|Tigerofdarkness]] ([[User talk:Tigerofdarkness\|talk]]) 10:53, 9 April 2023 (UTC)