Send Beginners mailing list submissions to
beginners@haskell.org
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/beginners
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
beginners-requ...@haskell.org
You can reach the person managing the list at
beginners-ow...@haskell.org
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Beginners digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: Question about time consume when calculate prime numbers
(Yi Cheng)
2. Re: Question about time consume when calculate prime numbers
(Lorenzo Bolla)
3. Re: Question about time consume when calculate prime numbers
(Yi Cheng)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2012 20:17:54 +0800
From: Yi Cheng <chengyi...@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Haskell-beginners] Question about time consume when
calculate prime numbers
To: Lorenzo Bolla <lbo...@gmail.com>
Cc: beginners@haskell.org
Message-ID:
<caek-nmenqhk4ww6kdi-6dwwarrfzz3nqxx0rgknu0l7sehe...@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Thanks for answering my question, but I'm still confused by some details.
I don't quite agree with you that Eratosthenes algorithm must be
implemented with a complexity of O(n^2) in space. When the n is used to
calculate the primes below it, it can be implemented in space complexity
O(n). For example, in languages, like C/C++, we can allocate a array. So I
think the the complexity of O(n^2) in space you mentioned, is the
complexity of "the beautiful code". So here's the question, can
Eratosthenes algorithm be implemented in a more gentle way?
Then I think maybe there is a more beautiful and practical way to implement
it.
One method of mine is trying to judge whether a number is a prime just by
the primes less than it, such as if the greatest common divisor of the
number and the product of the primes less than it equals to 1. But the
product of the primes is too large.
So I wander if there is a concise method to solve the problem with a faster
method. In my C++ version, the Eratosthenes is implemented in linear space
complexity, and optimize in filtering the numbers which can be divided by a
prime. This code is faster than the original algorithm implemented by me(It
was also implemented it in C++, and slower than the following code).
I know, when writing Haskell code, it would be better to forget some
experience in command-line language, but I want to know whether there is a
faster method to solve the problem.
Thank you.
Yi. Cheng
The code in my c++ version.
#include <iostream>
using namespace std;
int main(){
int p[2000000] = {0};
long sum = 0;
int f = 1;
for(long i=2; i <= 2000000; ++i){
if(p[i] == 0){
sum += i;
for(long j = i * i; j < 2000000; j += i)
p[j] = 1;
}
}
cout<<sum<<endl;
return 0;
}
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 5:26 PM, Lorenzo Bolla <lbo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 9:06 AM, Yi Cheng <chengyi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Recently, I'm trying to solve some problems in project euler using
>> haskell. When it came to problem 10, calculating the sum of all primes
>> below 20000000, I try to write a program which can generate primes.
>> In my memory Eratosthenes is faster than just whether a number can be
>> divided by the number less then the square root of it.
>> Firstly, I wrote the following programs:
>>
>> module Main where
>> isPrime x = isPrime' 3 x (round . sqrt. fromIntegral $ x)
>> isPrime' d target maxd
>> | d > maxd = True
>> | mod target d == 0 = False
>> | otherwise = isPrime' (d + 2) target maxd
>>
>> main = print $ (sum (filter isPrime [3,5..2000000]) + 2)
>>
>> And it consume about 11s in my computer.
>> Then, I tried to figure out how to solve the problem by Eratosthenes, but
>> failed. Later, I find a program implemented by others, meeting my purpose
>> and I've used it to solve the problem:
>>
>> primes :: [Int]
>> primes = primes' [2..]
>>
>> primes' :: [Int] -> [Int]
>> primes' [] = []
>> primes' (n:ns) = n : primes' (filter (\v -> v `mod` n /= 0) ns)
>>
>> solve x = sum $ primes' [2..x]
>>
>> main = print $ solve 2000000
>>
>> Well, although the code is beautiful, it is slow. Even waiting for a
>> minute, no answer was printed.
>>
>> In C version, Eratosthenes is faster than the method implemented in my
>> earlier code, which only consume 0.3s(the earlier method consume 1.6s).
>>
>> So I want to know, why Eratosthenes implemented in Haskell is slow than
>> the ugly code implemented by me.
>> Could anyone tell me?
>>
>>
> Eratosthenes's complexity is O(n^2) (both space and time), whereas the
> "ugly" one has a sub-quadratic running complexity and linear in space.
>
> Try to profile them:
> $> ghc -O2 --make -prof -auto-all <filename>
> $> ./primes +RTS -p -hc
> $> hp2ps primes.hp
>
> You'll see that most of the time is spent allocating space which is never
> released.
> You could play a bit with strictness, but the main problem is the awful
> complexity of the algorithm.
>
> hth,
> L.
>
>
>
>
>> Thank you
>> Yi Cheng
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Beginners mailing list
>> Beginners@haskell.org
>> http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/beginners
>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://www.haskell.org/pipermail/beginners/attachments/20120912/07b1a4c7/attachment-0001.htm>
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2012 13:41:41 +0100
From: Lorenzo Bolla <lbo...@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Haskell-beginners] Question about time consume when
calculate prime numbers
To: Yi Cheng <chengyi...@gmail.com>
Cc: beginners@haskell.org
Message-ID:
<cadjgtry5kbksa4ebhtcae9crasnemzouxxv0y0mbw8mompr...@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 1:17 PM, Yi Cheng <chengyi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Thanks for answering my question, but I'm still confused by some details.
> I don't quite agree with you that Eratosthenes algorithm must be
> implemented with a complexity of O(n^2) in space. When the n is used to
> calculate the primes below it, it can be implemented in space complexity
> O(n). For example, in languages, like C/C++, we can allocate a array. So I
> think the the complexity of O(n^2) in space you mentioned, is the
> complexity of "the beautiful code". So here's the question, can
> Eratosthenes algorithm be implemented in a more gentle way?
>
Correct: I referred to your implementation. See here (
http://www.haskell.org/haskellwiki/Prime_numbers#Sieve_of_Eratosthenes) for
many different (and more efficient) implementations of Eratosthenes.
Then I think maybe there is a more beautiful and practical way to implement
> it.
> One method of mine is trying to judge whether a number is a prime just by
> the primes less than it, such as if the greatest common divisor of the
> number and the product of the primes less than it equals to 1. But the
> product of the primes is too large.
>
> So I wander if there is a concise method to solve the problem with a
> faster method. In my C++ version, the Eratosthenes is implemented in linear
> space complexity, and optimize in filtering the numbers which can be
> divided by a prime. This code is faster than the original algorithm
> implemented by me(It was also implemented it in C++, and slower than the
> following code).
> I know, when writing Haskell code, it would be better to forget some
> experience in command-line language, but I want to know whether there is a
> faster method to solve the problem.
>
>
> Thank you.
> Yi. Cheng
>
> The code in my c++ version.
> #include <iostream>
> using namespace std;
> int main(){
> int p[2000000] = {0};
> long sum = 0;
> int f = 1;
> for(long i=2; i <= 2000000; ++i){
> if(p[i] == 0){
> sum += i;
> for(long j = i * i; j < 2000000; j += i)
> p[j] = 1;
> }
> }
> cout<<sum<<endl;
> return 0;
>
> }
>
>
This implementation looks like the one here:
http://www.haskell.org/haskellwiki/Prime_numbers#From_Squares, with the
difference that in C++ you are modifying your array in-place instead of
generating it lazily. It's not equivalent to your "beautiful" version in
Haskell.
hth,
L.
> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 5:26 PM, Lorenzo Bolla <lbo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 9:06 AM, Yi Cheng <chengyi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Recently, I'm trying to solve some problems in project euler using
>>> haskell. When it came to problem 10, calculating the sum of all primes
>>> below 20000000, I try to write a program which can generate primes.
>>> In my memory Eratosthenes is faster than just whether a number can be
>>> divided by the number less then the square root of it.
>>> Firstly, I wrote the following programs:
>>>
>>> module Main where
>>> isPrime x = isPrime' 3 x (round . sqrt. fromIntegral $ x)
>>> isPrime' d target maxd
>>> | d > maxd = True
>>> | mod target d == 0 = False
>>> | otherwise = isPrime' (d + 2) target maxd
>>>
>>> main = print $ (sum (filter isPrime [3,5..2000000]) + 2)
>>>
>>> And it consume about 11s in my computer.
>>> Then, I tried to figure out how to solve the problem by Eratosthenes,
>>> but failed. Later, I find a program implemented by others, meeting my
>>> purpose and I've used it to solve the problem:
>>>
>>> primes :: [Int]
>>> primes = primes' [2..]
>>>
>>> primes' :: [Int] -> [Int]
>>> primes' [] = []
>>> primes' (n:ns) = n : primes' (filter (\v -> v `mod` n /= 0) ns)
>>>
>>> solve x = sum $ primes' [2..x]
>>>
>>> main = print $ solve 2000000
>>>
>>> Well, although the code is beautiful, it is slow. Even waiting for a
>>> minute, no answer was printed.
>>>
>>> In C version, Eratosthenes is faster than the method implemented in my
>>> earlier code, which only consume 0.3s(the earlier method consume 1.6s).
>>>
>>> So I want to know, why Eratosthenes implemented in Haskell is slow than
>>> the ugly code implemented by me.
>>> Could anyone tell me?
>>>
>>>
>> Eratosthenes's complexity is O(n^2) (both space and time), whereas the
>> "ugly" one has a sub-quadratic running complexity and linear in space.
>>
>> Try to profile them:
>> $> ghc -O2 --make -prof -auto-all <filename>
>> $> ./primes +RTS -p -hc
>> $> hp2ps primes.hp
>>
>> You'll see that most of the time is spent allocating space which is never
>> released.
>> You could play a bit with strictness, but the main problem is the awful
>> complexity of the algorithm.
>>
>> hth,
>> L.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> Thank you
>>> Yi Cheng
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Beginners mailing list
>>> Beginners@haskell.org
>>> http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/beginners
>>>
>>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://www.haskell.org/pipermail/beginners/attachments/20120912/200803fd/attachment-0001.htm>
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2012 23:53:49 +0800
From: Yi Cheng <chengyi...@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Haskell-beginners] Question about time consume when
calculate prime numbers
To: Lorenzo Bolla <lbo...@gmail.com>
Cc: beginners@haskell.org
Message-ID:
<caek-nmeuahncx+0roowhbarenw+vzsqsvm4eyqnqtssc5sv...@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Thank you, very much. It's exactly the thing I want to know.
Yi. Cheng
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 8:41 PM, Lorenzo Bolla <lbo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 1:17 PM, Yi Cheng <chengyi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> Thanks for answering my question, but I'm still confused by some details.
>> I don't quite agree with you that Eratosthenes algorithm must be
>> implemented with a complexity of O(n^2) in space. When the n is used to
>> calculate the primes below it, it can be implemented in space complexity
>> O(n). For example, in languages, like C/C++, we can allocate a array. So I
>> think the the complexity of O(n^2) in space you mentioned, is the
>> complexity of "the beautiful code". So here's the question, can
>> Eratosthenes algorithm be implemented in a more gentle way?
>>
>
> Correct: I referred to your implementation. See here (
> http://www.haskell.org/haskellwiki/Prime_numbers#Sieve_of_Eratosthenes)
> for many different (and more efficient) implementations of Eratosthenes.
>
>
> Then I think maybe there is a more beautiful and practical way to
>> implement it.
>> One method of mine is trying to judge whether a number is a prime just by
>> the primes less than it, such as if the greatest common divisor of the
>> number and the product of the primes less than it equals to 1. But the
>> product of the primes is too large.
>>
>> So I wander if there is a concise method to solve the problem with a
>> faster method. In my C++ version, the Eratosthenes is implemented in linear
>> space complexity, and optimize in filtering the numbers which can be
>> divided by a prime. This code is faster than the original algorithm
>> implemented by me(It was also implemented it in C++, and slower than the
>> following code).
>> I know, when writing Haskell code, it would be better to forget some
>> experience in command-line language, but I want to know whether there is a
>> faster method to solve the problem.
>>
>>
>> Thank you.
>> Yi. Cheng
>>
>> The code in my c++ version.
>> #include <iostream>
>> using namespace std;
>> int main(){
>> int p[2000000] = {0};
>> long sum = 0;
>> int f = 1;
>> for(long i=2; i <= 2000000; ++i){
>> if(p[i] == 0){
>> sum += i;
>> for(long j = i * i; j < 2000000; j += i)
>> p[j] = 1;
>> }
>> }
>> cout<<sum<<endl;
>> return 0;
>>
>> }
>>
>>
> This implementation looks like the one here:
> http://www.haskell.org/haskellwiki/Prime_numbers#From_Squares, with the
> difference that in C++ you are modifying your array in-place instead of
> generating it lazily. It's not equivalent to your "beautiful" version in
> Haskell.
>
> hth,
> L.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 5:26 PM, Lorenzo Bolla <lbo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 9:06 AM, Yi Cheng <chengyi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Recently, I'm trying to solve some problems in project euler using
>>>> haskell. When it came to problem 10, calculating the sum of all primes
>>>> below 20000000, I try to write a program which can generate primes.
>>>> In my memory Eratosthenes is faster than just whether a number can be
>>>> divided by the number less then the square root of it.
>>>> Firstly, I wrote the following programs:
>>>>
>>>> module Main where
>>>> isPrime x = isPrime' 3 x (round . sqrt. fromIntegral $ x)
>>>> isPrime' d target maxd
>>>> | d > maxd = True
>>>> | mod target d == 0 = False
>>>> | otherwise = isPrime' (d + 2) target maxd
>>>>
>>>> main = print $ (sum (filter isPrime [3,5..2000000]) + 2)
>>>>
>>>> And it consume about 11s in my computer.
>>>> Then, I tried to figure out how to solve the problem by Eratosthenes,
>>>> but failed. Later, I find a program implemented by others, meeting my
>>>> purpose and I've used it to solve the problem:
>>>>
>>>> primes :: [Int]
>>>> primes = primes' [2..]
>>>>
>>>> primes' :: [Int] -> [Int]
>>>> primes' [] = []
>>>> primes' (n:ns) = n : primes' (filter (\v -> v `mod` n /= 0) ns)
>>>>
>>>> solve x = sum $ primes' [2..x]
>>>>
>>>> main = print $ solve 2000000
>>>>
>>>> Well, although the code is beautiful, it is slow. Even waiting for a
>>>> minute, no answer was printed.
>>>>
>>>> In C version, Eratosthenes is faster than the method implemented in my
>>>> earlier code, which only consume 0.3s(the earlier method consume 1.6s).
>>>>
>>>> So I want to know, why Eratosthenes implemented in Haskell is slow than
>>>> the ugly code implemented by me.
>>>> Could anyone tell me?
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Eratosthenes's complexity is O(n^2) (both space and time), whereas the
>>> "ugly" one has a sub-quadratic running complexity and linear in space.
>>>
>>> Try to profile them:
>>> $> ghc -O2 --make -prof -auto-all <filename>
>>> $> ./primes +RTS -p -hc
>>> $> hp2ps primes.hp
>>>
>>> You'll see that most of the time is spent allocating space which is
>>> never released.
>>> You could play a bit with strictness, but the main problem is the awful
>>> complexity of the algorithm.
>>>
>>> hth,
>>> L.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Thank you
>>>> Yi Cheng
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Beginners mailing list
>>>> Beginners@haskell.org
>>>> http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/beginners
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://www.haskell.org/pipermail/beginners/attachments/20120912/868e18c1/attachment.htm>
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Beginners mailing list
Beginners@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/beginners
End of Beginners Digest, Vol 51, Issue 19
*****************************************
