Karl Pflästerer schrieb:
On 19 Mrz 2005, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[Code]
Maybe sombody likes...
I did it ... :
def sieve (max):
max = max + 1
border = round(max**0.5)
nums = range(0, max)
nums[0] = nums[1] = None
for p in nums:
if p:
if p = border: break
Gregor Lingl wrote:
The following variation of your sieve, using
extended slice assignment seems to
be sgnificantly faster. Try it out, if you like.
Here are the numbers:
Primes 1 - 1,000,000 timing:
extendedSliceSieve: 0.708388 seconds
listPrimes: 0.998758 seconds
On 19 Mrz 2005, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[Code]
Maybe sombody likes to compare these algorithms to the
ones mentioned before in this thread. I would be
interested in the results.
I did it and on my machine here (a slow one) the following straight
forward version is the fastest one.
It's no
Hi all of you!
Many thanks for your remarks, ideas and experiments.
When I posted my input yesterday:
[x for x in range(2,100) if not [y for y in range(2,x) if x%y==0]]
my intention was indeed to find a shortest a program, disregarding
efficiency. Thus range instead of xrange etc.
(About one year
