On Saturday 12 March 2011 21:57:06 Cactus wrote:
> On Mar 11, 10:52 pm, Cactus wrote:
> > On Mar 9, 5:55 pm, Case Vanhorsen wrote:
> > > On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 8:53 AM, Cactus wrote:
> > > > On Mar 8, 8:21 pm, Cactus wrote:
> > > >> On Feb 14, 10:18 am, Jason wrote:
> > > >> > On Sunday 13 Feb
On Mar 11, 10:52 pm, Cactus wrote:
> On Mar 9, 5:55 pm, Case Vanhorsen wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 8:53 AM, Cactus wrote:
>
> > > On Mar 8, 8:21 pm, Cactus wrote:
> > >> On Feb 14, 10:18 am, Jason wrote:
>
> > >> > On Sunday 13 February 2011 16:43:47 Cactus wrote:
>
> > >> >
On Mar 9, 5:55 pm, Case Vanhorsen wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 8:53 AM, Cactus wrote:
>
> > On Mar 8, 8:21 pm, Cactus wrote:
> >> On Feb 14, 10:18 am, Jason wrote:
>
> >> > On Sunday 13 February 2011 16:43:47 Cactus wrote:
>
> >> > > [cut previous text]
>
> >> > > > > Probably the easiest
On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 8:53 AM, Cactus wrote:
>
>
> On Mar 8, 8:21 pm, Cactus wrote:
>> On Feb 14, 10:18 am, Jason wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > On Sunday 13 February 2011 16:43:47 Cactus wrote:
>>
>> > > [cut previous text]
>>
>> > > > > Probably the easiest solution on Windows is to simply to exp
My personal opinion is any new functions should be available on all
platforms, for portability of code reasons.
On 9 March 2011 16:53, Cactus wrote:
>
>
> On Mar 8, 8:21 pm, Cactus wrote:
>> On Feb 14, 10:18 am, Jason wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > On Sunday 13 February 2011 16:43:47 Cactus wrote:
On Mar 8, 8:21 pm, Cactus wrote:
> On Feb 14, 10:18 am, Jason wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Sunday 13 February 2011 16:43:47 Cactus wrote:
>
> > > [cut previous text]
>
> > > > > Probably the easiest solution on Windows is to simply to express the
> > > > > integer parameters of ui/si functions (and
On Feb 14, 10:18 am, Jason wrote:
> On Sunday 13 February 2011 16:43:47 Cactus wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > [cut previous text]
>
> > > > Probably the easiest solution on Windows is to simply to express the
> > > > integer parameters of ui/si functions (and some internal integers in
> > > > the
On Sunday 13 February 2011 16:43:47 Cactus wrote:
> [cut previous text]
>
> > > Probably the easiest solution on Windows is to simply to express the
> > > integer parameters of ui/si functions (and some internal integers in
> > > the functions themselves) as a new global integer type that is
> > >
[cut previous text]
> > Probably the easiest solution on Windows is to simply to express the
> > integer parameters of ui/si functions (and some internal integers in
> > the functions themselves) as a new global integer type that is
> > (unsigned) long on 32-bit Windows systems and (unsigned) lon
On Sat, Feb 12, 2011 at 12:12 PM, Cactus wrote:
>
>
> On Feb 12, 7:00 pm, Jason wrote:
>> One point I forgot to mention is that it's pretty certain that only 32 and 64
>> bit will work , there was some discussion about 10 years ago that even then
>> 16
>> bit wouldn't work , nails worked but onl
On Feb 12, 7:00 pm, Jason wrote:
> One point I forgot to mention is that it's pretty certain that only 32 and 64
> bit will work , there was some discussion about 10 years ago that even then 16
> bit wouldn't work , nails worked but only for a very limited set of values ,
> and even then there w
One point I forgot to mention is that it's pretty certain that only 32 and 64
bit will work , there was some discussion about 10 years ago that even then 16
bit wouldn't work , nails worked but only for a very limited set of values ,
and even then there were dubious performance benefits.
On Sat
On 12 February 2011 18:14, Jason wrote:
> Hi
>
> Some random thoughts.
>
> I think if we add new functions to the mpz layer , however it is done , then
> it's possible that GMP may choose to have a set of incompatible functions
> which will be a headache for everyone.
>
True.
> We have to remai
Hi
Some random thoughts.
I think if we add new functions to the mpz layer , however it is done , then
it's possible that GMP may choose to have a set of incompatible functions
which will be a headache for everyone.
We have to remain compatible with GMP so the ui/si function must be long's ,
There's two other problems with what I suggest:
1) If someone builds MPIR in the default manner and an ui happens to
be 2 limbs, the code may run slower in MPIR than GMP.
2) flint2 has the convention that ui is an mp_limb_t and not a long.
So I'm not even consistent in my own code.
Lots of other
On 12 February 2011 13:11, Cactus wrote:
>
>
> On Feb 12, 12:50 pm, Bill Hart wrote:
>> On 12 February 2011 10:07, Cactus wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > On Feb 9, 10:10 am, Cactus wrote:
>> >> On Feb 8, 3:50 am, Case Vanhorsen wrote:
>>
>> >> > On Mon, Feb 7, 2011 at 7:47 AM, Cac
On Feb 12, 12:50 pm, Bill Hart wrote:
> On 12 February 2011 10:07, Cactus wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Feb 9, 10:10 am, Cactus wrote:
> >> On Feb 8, 3:50 am, Case Vanhorsen wrote:
>
> >> > On Mon, Feb 7, 2011 at 7:47 AM, Cactus wrote:
>
> >> > > On Feb 7, 3:09 pm, Case Vanhorsen wrot
On 12 February 2011 10:07, Cactus wrote:
>
>
> On Feb 9, 10:10 am, Cactus wrote:
>> On Feb 8, 3:50 am, Case Vanhorsen wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > On Mon, Feb 7, 2011 at 7:47 AM, Cactus wrote:
>>
>> > > On Feb 7, 3:09 pm, Case Vanhorsen wrote:
>> > >> On Mon, Feb 7, 2011 at 7:00 AM,
On Feb 9, 10:10 am, Cactus wrote:
> On Feb 8, 3:50 am, Case Vanhorsen wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Mon, Feb 7, 2011 at 7:47 AM, Cactus wrote:
>
> > > On Feb 7, 3:09 pm, Case Vanhorsen wrote:
> > >> On Mon, Feb 7, 2011 at 7:00 AM, Cactus wrote:
>
> > >> > This would also be a significant t
On Feb 8, 3:50 am, Case Vanhorsen wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 7, 2011 at 7:47 AM, Cactus wrote:
>
> > On Feb 7, 3:09 pm, Case Vanhorsen wrote:
> >> On Mon, Feb 7, 2011 at 7:00 AM, Cactus wrote:
>
> >> > This would also be a significant task but it would solve this problem
> >> > once and for all.
>
On Mon, Feb 7, 2011 at 7:47 AM, Cactus wrote:
>
> On Feb 7, 3:09 pm, Case Vanhorsen wrote:
>> On Mon, Feb 7, 2011 at 7:00 AM, Cactus wrote:
>>
>
>> > This would also be a significant task but it would solve this problem
>> > once and for all.
>>
>> It does keep the API from growing. I can see it
On Feb 7, 3:09 pm, Case Vanhorsen wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 7, 2011 at 7:00 AM, Cactus wrote:
>
> > This would also be a significant task but it would solve this problem
> > once and for all.
>
> It does keep the API from growing. I can see it working with
> statically linked applications (like gmpy
On Mon, Feb 7, 2011 at 7:00 AM, Cactus wrote:
>
>
> On Feb 7, 2:29 pm, Case Vanhorsen wrote:
>> On Mon, Feb 7, 2011 at 1:03 AM, Cactus wrote:
>>
>> > On Feb 7, 7:23 am, Case Vanhorsen wrote:
>> >> On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 7:50 AM, Cactus wrote:
>> >> > Having been caught once more by the often m
On Feb 7, 2:29 pm, Case Vanhorsen wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 7, 2011 at 1:03 AM, Cactus wrote:
>
> > On Feb 7, 7:23 am, Case Vanhorsen wrote:
> >> On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 7:50 AM, Cactus wrote:
> >> > Having been caught once more by the often made, but incorrect,
> >> > assumption that the length of
On Mon, Feb 7, 2011 at 1:03 AM, Cactus wrote:
>
>
> On Feb 7, 7:23 am, Case Vanhorsen wrote:
>> On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 7:50 AM, Cactus wrote:
>> > Having been caught once more by the often made, but incorrect,
>> > assumption that the length of the 'long int' types GMP and MPIR use in
>> > conve
On Feb 7, 7:23 am, Case Vanhorsen wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 7:50 AM, Cactus wrote:
> > Having been caught once more by the often made, but incorrect,
> > assumption that the length of the 'long int' types GMP and MPIR use in
> > conversions match the length of limbs, I am wondering if it
26 matches
Mail list logo
