[QUOTE=lycorn;395932]Fair enough, I appreciate that. It´s already a good thing 0.21 allows <1M exponents and the sieving for lower bit levels, even if the performance is not really tuned. In fact, I have also used 0.21 for higher bit levels, and the throughput is way better.

To give an idea: (GTX 560Ti, GPU@900MHz)

500 k , 61-62 bits: 130 GHz-d/d

500 k, 62-63 bits: 205 GHZ-d/d

500 k, 64-65 bits: 357 GHz d/d

I´ll probably run some more benchies and keep you posted.[/QUOTE]


I would go for[LIST][*]2[SUP]?[/SUP] to 2[SUP]64[/SUP] in a single step[*]2[SUP]64[/SUP] to 2[SUP]something above 64[/SUP] in the second step.[*]single bit levels if the time per class is at least 1 second or so.[/LIST]For below 2[SUP]64[/SUP] it might be worth trying the LessClasses version.

Oliver

Does someone have a clever workaround for [URL="https://connect.microsoft.com/VisualStudio/feedback/details/794991/c-error-directive-and-unix-line-endings-leads-to-an-unexpected-end-of-file"]this[/URL]?

As I do development on Linux I'll stay with UNIX line endings!

Oliver

[QUOTE=TheJudger;395936]Does someone have a clever workaround for [URL="https://connect.microsoft.com/VisualStudio/feedback/details/794991/c-error-directive-and-unix-line-endings-leads-to-an-unexpected-end-of-file"]this[/URL]?

As I do development on Linux I'll stay with UNIX line endings!
[/QUOTE]

Source control systems (such as GIT) often have an option to fix/change line endings on check-in, check-out automatically.

[QUOTE=kladner;395921]Norton Internet Security gave the same complaint. I believe that such flags are based on the application being unknown in the Norton Community database. There are no direct heuristics indicating malware aside from the file having very restricted distribution.[/QUOTE]
Huh, now this is really strange. MFAKTC gets the seal of approval from Norton 360's "File Insight" feature (see attachment), while N360 itself has never flagged it on my PC during a scan.

So NPE and NIS dislike it, while N360 and File Insight are OK with it.

Maybe these various Symantec applications are maintained by rival teams... :smile:

Rodrigo

[QUOTE=Rodrigo;395967]Huh, now this is really strange. MFAKTC gets the seal of approval from Norton 360's "File Insight" feature (see attachment), while N360 itself has never flagged it on my PC during a scan.

So NPE and NIS dislike it, while N360 and File Insight are OK with it.

Maybe these various Symantec applications are maintained by rival teams... :smile:

Rodrigo[/QUOTE]

I only had problems with the 0.21 files. In the first instance, it gave dire warnings, but allowed me to authorize their use. The next time (I was testing 32bit vs 64bit), it horned in and quarantined the file. Through dogged insistence I managed to make NIS disgorge its prey. I played this game a few times before I beat down Norton's resistance.

Problem processing worktodo.add
 

I'm working on adding support for worktodo.add to MISFIT and I came across a problem with mfaktc

During startup of mfaktc if WorkToDo.txt has no rows the program exits instead of proactively inbounding rows from WorkToDo.add

So if workToDo.txt runs dry it is impossible to get it mfaktc restarted without first manually moving data out of the .Add file.

I think during startup mfaktc should check for the .add file and process it if it exists.


Scott

[QUOTE=swl551;396777]I'm working on adding support for worktodo.add to MISFIT and I came across a problem with mfaktc

During startup of mfaktc if WorkToDo.txt has no rows the program exits instead of proactively inbounding rows from WorkToDo.add

So if workToDo.txt runs dry it is impossible to get it mfaktc restarted without first manually moving data out of the .Add file.

I think during startup mfaktc should check for the .add file and process it if it exists.


Scott[/QUOTE]

Does the program not have an emergency dump-from-staging-file routine?

[QUOTE=TheMawn;396778]Does the program not have an emergency dump-from-staging-file routine?[/QUOTE]

The Judger would have to answer, but it appears it does not read from the .add file in an "Emergency"

Hi Scott (other aswell)!
[LIST][*]Add worktodo.add always to worktodo.txt on startup, yes, why not (read: good idea, I'll do this in the next release)[*]Add worktodo.add to worktodo.txt on [I]"emergency"[/I]? What is an [I]"emergency"[/I]? Processed everything from worktodo.txt? Well, I don't feel comfortable with "add worktodo.add to worktodo.txt" in that case, this will break the whole idea of worktodo.add. Imagin only one exponent left in worktodo.txt and StopAfterFactor=2 (mfaktc.ini), while you edit worktodo.add a factor is found... Same as editing worktodo.txt, isn't it?[/LIST]
Oliver

[QUOTE=swl551;396788]The Judger would have to answer, but it appears it does not read from the .add file in an "Emergency"[/QUOTE]

No, I was talking about Misfit. Does it not dump whatever is in the staging file if worktodo.txt falls below a certain threshold?

[QUOTE=TheMawn;396819]No, I was talking about Misfit. Does it not dump whatever is in the staging file if worktodo.txt falls below a certain threshold?[/QUOTE]

I am working to implement support for .add where misfit will not load directly into live work files.