Talk:Prime decomposition: Difference between revisions
Content added Content deleted
No edit summary |
(→Notes: new section) |
||
| Line 28: | Line 28: | ||
Could some please explain how to run the haskell implementation? (I am also curious how the 'primes' are used |
Could some please explain how to run the haskell implementation? (I am also curious how the 'primes' are used |
||
in the factorize method.) [[User:Rahul|Rahul]] 11:09, 23 September 2008 (UTC) |
in the factorize method.) [[User:Rahul|Rahul]] 11:09, 23 September 2008 (UTC) |
||
== Notes == |
|||
I believe two task requirements put focus out of the "prime decomposition" aim: |
|||
* returning an array or collection: stress on how to handle a growing/dynamic array/collection for those language that do not handle arrays/collections as easily as Python, Perl, Octave, J... and any other having an "evoluted" array type... or on how to determine previously the number of prime factors... |
|||
* big nums: stress on the usage of an extern lib for big nums if the language does not handle them ''innerly''; easy if they exist widely available bindings e.g. to the GMP or similar; harder if not... |
|||
C, Fortran (and likely more) can't accomplish the array-requirement easily (of course they can... but self-made array handling code will be needed...); for Fortran, I've failed (for now) using GMP bindings... |
|||
To me, both requirements should be dropped (bignums and the use of "growing arrays" should be other tasks) --[[User:ShinTakezou|ShinTakezou]] 14:09, 7 April 2009 (UTC) |
|||