|Charles Greathouse on Thu, 25 Oct 2012 22:17:09 +0200|
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
|Re: forprime in 32bit is 50x slower if p>2^32|
Maybe I'll set up my build script to make both 32- and 64-bit, then. I haven't tested any of my 32-bit code, though I usually write code in both forms when convenient. Charles Greathouse Analyst/Programmer Case Western Reserve University On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 3:59 PM, Bill Allombert <Bill.Allombert@math.u-bordeaux1.fr> wrote: > On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 03:34:46PM -0400, Charles Greathouse wrote: >> > Maybe we could at least replace 210 by something larger. >> >> Maybe. Maybe even use a small sieve if the numbers are large enough >> (not in this case...), say of length 4 log x (98% likely to contain >> the next prime). >> >> > If you had to debug ellheegner in 32bit, you might change your mind. >> > >> > Beside ARM users are stuck with 32bit for some years still. >> >> Yes, it's bad for Windows and ARM users (as well as legacy users). I >> do think it would be nice, but I have a hard time seeing how it could >> be fit in. Even if I had a machine to test with I owe Karim an >> implementation of forfactored() first. > > Well, I do not mean to insist, but I need to clarify that it is usually very > easy to build 32bit binaries on a 64bit system. There is no need for a new > machine or a new OS or even a new compiler, only a 32bit libc. Just do > CC='gcc -m32' ./Configure. > > Cheers, > Bill.