View Single Post
Old 2019-11-03, 13:34   #11
storm5510
Random Account
 
storm5510's Avatar
 
Aug 2009

3·661 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MrRepunit View Post
When I started the fork of mfaktc I was only considering base 10 repunits, so I had to 'deoptimize' some code. I removed the Barrett kernels as they seemed unsuited to fit the base 10 and also more general bases. I needed to generalize some methods that where using the better performant shl instruction (optional_mul). Also implementing the 64 bit kernel was for speeding up lower exponents. Mersenne numbers are already factored far beyond this point.That considered the current version is definitively not optimal for factoring Mersenne numbers, but tries to focus on other bases and smaller exponents.

Reading the default base from the configuration file is a good idea, will implement this soon.

However, I am not sure if gr-mfaktc should be a complete replacement for mfaktc (it is still the project from TheJudger), or if it should be thought as an orthogonal project that puts the focus on general repunits. I could certainly try to start from scratch againg and cherry-pick my changes while leaving the Mersenne & Wagstaff number stuff mainly untouched and just add more functionality. Maybe TheJudger has some thoughts about this...
Thank you for the reply! If anyone wants to run Base 2, having the setting in the configuration file will remove any ambiguity and assignments, as presented by PrimeNet, would run without any modifications.

Your project goes in a different direction so I would not fret much over base two. I find the possibility of being able to run different bases quite interesting.

storm5510 is offline   Reply With Quote