Anonymous user
Talk:Strange unique prime triplets: Difference between revisions
→added a stretch goal: added some comments.
m (→added a stretch goal: sp.) |
(→added a stretch goal: added some comments.) |
||
Line 39:
:::: a run of 10_000 takes <37 secs for the Python code. (I suspect the sieve library may be written in C). I am fine with the 1_000 limit as it stands --[[User:Paddy3118|Paddy3118]] ([[User talk:Paddy3118|talk]]) 13:07, 11 March 2021 (UTC)
::::: Extending the limit based on one's own favorite computer programming language (or any one specific language) timings shouldn't be the criteria for a stretch goal. There are slower computer programming languages that wouldn't attempt a run of that size. The reason for this site is to compare (among other things) programming language constructs, algorithms, idioms, methods, etc, without having a contest to see how many numbers can be generated/produced in the shortest amount of time. I'd like to see less of how fast a certain computer programming language can execute/compute the results (for a stretch goal or whatever). I don't mind viewing the comparison of how fast dissimilar algorithms/methods are when using the same particular computer language (method '''A''' is 50% faster than method '''B'''). -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger|Gerard Schildberger]] ([[User talk:Gerard Schildberger|talk]]) 13:24, 11 March 2021 (UTC)
|