Path: csiph.com!usenet.pasdenom.info!gegeweb.org!de-l.enfer-du-nord.net!feeder1.enfer-du-nord.net!cs.uu.nl!news.stack.nl!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Marco van de Voort Newsgroups: comp.lang.pascal.borland Subject: Re: Prime Number Programming Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2012 14:06:55 +0000 (UTC) Organization: Stack Usenet News Service Lines: 21 Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: toad.stack.nl Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: mud.stack.nl 1342706815 25773 2001:610:1108:5010::135 (19 Jul 2012 14:06:55 GMT) X-Complaints-To: abuse@stack.nl NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2012 14:06:55 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: slrn/0.9.9p1 (FreeBSD) Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.pascal.borland:106 On 2012-07-19, KBH wrote: > Here is the subject: > > http://www.delphigroups.info/2/e9/3997-2.html No that is random url with a very long discussion. > And when I say that I have prime number code that does not have any > unnecessary operations I mean that all divisions are by prime numbers. > But then that poster does take a larger view and seems to say that overall > efficiency doesn't really matter. Isn't that more childish ? Well, of course performance doesn't matter, otherwise one would use an optimizing compiler and not an old 16-bit TP. > But I like the trial division prime number code even though I have moved > on to other code. Once the trial division was run one time then it had > prime numbers in memory array to use for the next runs. So it could get > faster in use but didn't have files of prime numbers that could be deleted I'm not sure what the question in this post is?