![]() |
|
|
#353 |
|
Apr 2014
27 Posts |
P-1, ECM and LL results are now justified to the left while factor results are right justified.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#354 | |
|
Undefined
"The unspeakable one"
Jun 2006
My evil lair
22×32×173 Posts |
Quote:
But we have that ugly horizontal scrolling thing. I would like it so much better if my browser is allowed to activate its scrollbar at the bottom of the window, where I can always get to it. Rather than the table having its own scrollbar all the way at the bottom where I have to scroll all the way down to find it. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#355 | |
|
Serpentine Vermin Jar
Jul 2014
3,313 Posts |
Quote:
![]() I may have neglected to include factors found by P-1 and ECM in the "right justify", so I can certainly take care of that. Does it help at all to have the residues left-justified though? Or is that just blowing people's minds?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#356 |
|
Apr 2014
27 Posts |
When sorting by factor size the ll results (hex) gets sorted in with the factor results. If you could have the hex sort independent of the factors that would be ideal.
So it sorts each but independently. |
|
|
|
|
|
#357 |
|
"Kyle"
Feb 2005
Somewhere near M52..
39316 Posts |
Two of my three chances have turned out composite (big surprise). That 49th Mersenne Prime should be received by the server in another 72 hours or so...
|
|
|
|
|
|
#358 | |
|
Serpentine Vermin Jar
Jul 2014
3,313 Posts |
Quote:
![]() Okay, not really, I knew that wouldn't be the case, even the "mystery" result that had a log entry but didn't have an entry in the LL results table. On that one I bet George or others double-checked it on the spot and saw it was bad, and it was maybe held back from being inserted into that other table to make sure it didn't show up in any reports or something. Just a guess. Oh well, now they're "official" as being composite. Well... I have 2 more triple checks running... one due in 20 minutes, one due about 5 hours later. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#359 | |
|
Serpentine Vermin Jar
Jul 2014
3,313 Posts |
Quote:
With the mix of stuff in there, it does sort strangely. All of the residues that start with a number show up first, then the factors, then residues that start with A-F. For better results, sort on the result type first, then while holding shift, sort on the result column. Then it'll be more pleasant. I'll be the first to admit, the table sorting can be a little sluggish with 3000 rows, but that's dependent on your computer since it's done via javascript locally. On my laptop it's not so bad... on a faster box it does a little better. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#360 |
|
Aug 2012
Mass., USA
13E16 Posts |
I still need to do a 2-tier sort to get my assignments ordered so that both "Estimated Completion" and "days to go" at least appear to be in the correct order.
The first is sorted by Estimated Completion, and the second is sorted by days to go. |
|
|
|
|
|
#361 |
|
Dec 2012
2·139 Posts |
I apologise if this is not the right place for this suggestion, it not being a visual design matter, but would it be possible to expand the search capabilities on the Factoring Limits page? Though I know some will bemoan the point of this, I would like to be able to search for exponents that don't meet certain B1 and B2 requirements. (e.g. Give me all exponents from Mn to Mx that have had P-1 done with B1 less than 10^6 and B2 less than 10^7.) If the added boxes makes the page too ugly, you could put something like an "Advanced Search" text element (if that's the right term) which, when clicked on, expands the input.
If there is a good reason not to do this, then I will withdraw my request. There may be a good reason why we don't already have it. |
|
|
|
|
|
#362 | |
|
Serpentine Vermin Jar
Jul 2014
3,313 Posts |
Quote:
Would the main reason for this be to find exponents that haven't been ECM factored as far? If that's the case, you'd probably want to find the exponents with the smallest current bounds, and not just the ones in some arbitrary range of exponents? Or would you still want to have some kind of limit on the exponent? For example, the exponent that's had some ECM work done and has the lowest bound1/2 is 6907157 with b1=50,000 and b2=5,000,000. Do you care about the exponent size and just want the ones with the lowest current bounds? Another way you might find some exponents with minimal ECM work done is if I looked at the "total ECM effort" measurement the DB stores. By that measure, exponent 67281391 has had the least ECM work done (ecm effort=2000). Anyway, understanding your end goal might help me figure out how best to set something up. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#363 | |
|
Serpentine Vermin Jar
Jul 2014
3,313 Posts |
Quote:
If you sort just by days to go it would probably do what you're after (i.e. it would be sorted by that, and the estimated completion column would also be sorted correctly. |
|
|
|
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Database design | xilman | Astronomy | 1 | 2017-04-30 22:25 |
| Theoretical Experiment Design | c10ck3r | Homework Help | 7 | 2015-02-03 08:54 |
| Digital Logic Design | henryzz | Puzzles | 9 | 2014-12-04 20:56 |
| new intel design | tha | Hardware | 5 | 2007-04-19 11:38 |
| design factoring algorithms | koders333 | Factoring | 14 | 2006-01-25 14:08 |