Stephan wrote:
(C), Some people were (and some still are) confused:
packing an executable does _not_ have to be undone
by the end user; in fact, the end user need never
ever EVER know about it. There _are_no_drawbacks_.
No compute cost, no memory cost, only a space
savings. Which isn't
I vote no, if anyone's counting.
Stephan, if compressing the executable is that important to you, why not just compress your own copy? It really sounds as though many of the resident list experts feel this is a bad idea.
Has anyone considered writing a perl script to interface
{mprime|Prime95|other} to Primenet? It seems like dividing the communication
work from the math might be worthwhile, and since all the configuration lives
in .ini files and the output lives in .txt files, it should be easy for perl
to
Yes, so the *real* milestone is less than 10% away.
The real milestone is not 10^12 but rather 2^40 ops
per second. Lets get with it! My model predicts
we will hit 2^40 in May. {8-] spike
What's this number "40"? Shouldn't it be 2^(2^6-1) ? :)
In a message dated 6/10/99, 9:07:19 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The status page shows that for exponents in the range 3,310,000-3,960,000,
there are 225 exponents for which 2 L-L tests have been done, yet there are
40 exponents for which no factor is known, and no LL test has been done. I
Well, you've dropped the annoying Mandelbrot quote, but you're still trying
to stir up trouble on my favorite mailing list.
In a message dated 6/5/99 10:27:51 AM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes:
Are you sure of that? What if the bug didn't happen to strike my run, or the
