At 8:46 AM +0200 7/1/04, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Nope. Nor, if the freeze/thaw system is representation-neutral, as a
plugin option for parrot itself. There are just some license issues (or
I'm reading it wrong, which is an issue itself :) that make shippin
Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Nope. Nor, if the freeze/thaw system is representation-neutral, as a
> plugin option for parrot itself. There are just some license issues (or
> I'm reading it wrong, which is an issue itself :) that make shipping GMP
> with parrot problematic.
Isn't it e
On Fri, 25 Jun 2004, [ISO-8859-1] André Pang wrote:
> On 24/06/2004, at 6:31 PM, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
>
> >> i still have my stillborn bignum (using bcd registers and efficient
> >> algorithms) implementation if anyone wants to pick it up. i have some
> >> working base code and the overall desig
On Friday 25 June 2004 03:47, André Pang wrote:
> It only seems fair to be using the same library as Python, if you want
> a decent bignum speed comparison.
We don't mind being unfair, as long as parrot's winning :-)
Jerome
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
André pang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 24/06/2004, at 6:31 PM, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
>> The major problem is: we need bignum now^Wtomorrow^WRSN. The Pie-thon
>> benchmarks does use long (integer?) arithmetics: +, - *, //, % AFAIK.
> Is there a big problem with using GMP for the purposes of t
On 24/06/2004, at 6:31 PM, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
i still have my stillborn bignum (using bcd registers and efficient
algorithms) implementation if anyone wants to pick it up. i have some
working base code and the overall design.
The major problem is: we need bignum now^Wtomorrow^WRSN. The Pie-thon
> "LT" == Leopold Toetsch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
LT> Uri Guttman wrote:
>>> "SB" == Scott Bronson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
SB> Has anybody inquired to the GMP project as to the possibility
>> of
SB> relaxing that restriction? If GMP truly is the best bignum
SB> impleme
Uri Guttman wrote:
"SB" == Scott Bronson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
SB> Has anybody inquired to the GMP project as to the possibility of
SB> relaxing that restriction? If GMP truly is the best bignum
SB> implementation, I definitely think it's worth asking.
Not AFAIK. Please try.
i still ha
> "SB" == Scott Bronson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
SB> On Wed, 2004-06-23 at 08:12, Dan Sugalski wrote:
>> The license issues there require that the full source of GMP ship with any
>> binary copy. (the license has no "provide a place to fetch it"
>> provision--the source is required)
