On Jul 31, 2007, at 10:54 PM, Jonathan Bober wrote:
> On Tue, 2007-07-31 at 22:16 -0700, Justin C. Walker wrote:
>> On Jul 31, 2007, at 18:36 , William Stein wrote:
[snip]
> That is puzzling. Are you sure that you have the latest version of the
> code?
I downloaded the .3 source and ran it on my 2.33 GHz Core 2 Duo. I
compiled the program with several "-O" settings, and ran them with
the argument '1000000000':
Opt none: 2m11s
Opt 3: 2m8 s
Opt 2: 2m10s
Opt 1: 2m8 s
Opt s: 2m6 s
Opt z: 2m7 s
Opt fast: 2m6 s
Not a lot of difference, but all at least 126 seconds. Any
suggestions to figure out why this seems so far off from your (and
other's) experience?
Also, FWIW, if I run this through sage ("time number_of_partitions
(10^9)"), the time is ~134s.
Justin
--
Justin C. Walker, Curmudgeon-at-Large
() The ASCII Ribbon Campaign
/\ Help Cure HTML Email
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel
URLs: http://sage.scipy.org/sage/ and http://modular.math.washington.edu/sage/
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
