Talk:Pierpont primes: Difference between revisions
Content added Content deleted
Thundergnat (talk | contribs) (→Scale back 2nd part?: comment) |
(→Scale back 2nd part?: added a comment.) |
||
Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
:::It is very likely going to be much more efficient to generate Pierpont numbers and check if they are prime than to generate primes and check if they are Pierponts. --[[User:Thundergnat|Thundergnat]] ([[User talk:Thundergnat|talk]]) 01:20, 19 August 2019 (UTC) |
:::It is very likely going to be much more efficient to generate Pierpont numbers and check if they are prime than to generate primes and check if they are Pierponts. --[[User:Thundergnat|Thundergnat]] ([[User talk:Thundergnat|talk]]) 01:20, 19 August 2019 (UTC) |
||
:::: Essentially, this isn't going to help comparing computer programming code to find/display ginormous (Pierpont) primes, unless one has a robust '''isPrime''' function (mostly likely a BIF). There is nothing to learn about <u>using</u> an '''isPrime''' BIF. Otherwise, it's just an exercise in <strike>wasting</strike> consuming electric power. -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger|Gerard Schildberger]] ([[User talk:Gerard Schildberger|talk]]) 05:52, 19 August 2019 (UTC) |
Revision as of 05:54, 19 August 2019
Scale back 2nd part?
Do I need to scale back the second part? (Find 250th primes). I don't want to have goals that are mostly unobtainable, If so, what would be a more reasonable number? 150th? 100th? --Thundergnat (talk) 23:55, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
- Hm, I would guess not, since there is a brute force Go version that works quickly. The way I wrote my entry is probably slow in general or slow for my language. I saw it done with prime factorizations on OEIS and thought it looked elegant. I'll give a different method a shot when I get to it. --Chunes (talk) 00:27, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
- It is very likely going to be much more efficient to generate Pierpont numbers and check if they are prime than to generate primes and check if they are Pierponts. --Thundergnat (talk) 01:20, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
- Essentially, this isn't going to help comparing computer programming code to find/display ginormous (Pierpont) primes, unless one has a robust isPrime function (mostly likely a BIF). There is nothing to learn about using an isPrime BIF. Otherwise, it's just an exercise in
wastingconsuming electric power. -- Gerard Schildberger (talk) 05:52, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
- Essentially, this isn't going to help comparing computer programming code to find/display ginormous (Pierpont) primes, unless one has a robust isPrime function (mostly likely a BIF). There is nothing to learn about using an isPrime BIF. Otherwise, it's just an exercise in