On Sat, Jan 24, 2009 at 1:59 AM, YannLC wrote:
>
> I think we should use chinese remainder to work in smaller groups.
Huh?
William
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email t
To make it clearer, use Pohlig-Hellman algorithm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pohlig-Hellman_algorithm
On Jan 24, 11:05 am, William Stein wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 24, 2009 at 1:59 AM, YannLC wrote:
>
> > I think we should use chinese remainder to work in smaller groups.
>
> Huh?
>
> William
--~--
I wrote a trac ticket #5088 , and there is a patch waiting for review
(based on 3.2.3). We can now compute discrete logs in GF(2**63)
lightning fast.
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this grou
timings added
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
sage-devel-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-deve
in #5088, John Cremona wrote:
The next improvement we need is to replace the BSGS by something which
takes less memory
I thus made a first attempt to implement Pollard rho algorithm.
it's now trac #5098, with a proposed patch
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this
I have now a last patch providing Pollard lambda algorithm, should I
open a new ticket (needing #5098 to be applied first) or add it into
#5098 as it's almost the same topic?
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To u
On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 8:53 AM, YannLC wrote:
>
> I have now a last patch providing Pollard lambda algorithm, should I
> open a new ticket (needing #5098 to be applied first) or add it into
> #5098 as it's almost the same topic?
Make it a new ticket.
-- William
--~--~-~--~~--
