At 01:10 PM 6/11/99 -0600, Aaron Blosser wrote: > >If I see a test that will take well over a year, is it wrong of me to just >do it myself with a manual assignment? I think that is what should be done. A double check will have to be done anyway, so let the year-long test serve as the double check. Anything less than a P=166 is defaulting to double check assignments. If it is taking a year, then it is running on something considerably slower. +----------------------------------------------+ | Jud "program first and think later" McCranie | +----------------------------------------------+ ________________________________________________________________ Unsubscribe & list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm
- Re: Mersenne: status of exponents Yvan Dutil
- Re: Mersenne: status of exponents Yvan Dutil
- Re: Mersenne: status of exponents Jud McCranie
- Re: Mersenne: status of exponents Brian J. Beesley
- Mersenne: 286's and 386's running Prime95 Marc Getty
- RE: Mersenne: status of exponents JON STRAYER
- RE: Mersenne: status of exponents Jud McCranie
- Re: Mersenne: status of exponents Mikus Grinbergs
- Re: Mersenne: status of exponents Jeff Woods
- RE: Mersenne: status of exponents Aaron Blosser
- RE: Mersenne: status of exponents Jud McCranie
- RE: Mersenne: status of exponents Aaron Blosser
- Re: Mersenne: status of exponents Sturle Sunde
- RE: Mersenne: status of exponents Aaron Blosser
- Re: Mersenne: status of exponents Jud McCranie
- Re: Mersenne: status of exponents Sturle Sunde
- Re: Mersenne: status of exponents Jud McCranie
- Re: Mersenne: status of exponents Jud McCranie
- Re: Mersenne: status of exponents John R Pierce
- Re: Mersenne: status of exponen... Simon Burge
- Re: Mersenne: status of exponen... Spike Jones