"Tim Peters" <tim.one at comcast.net> writes: > [Michael Hudson] >> If something important -- like a pieing <wink> -- depends on it, and >> the ints are long enough, it's not that hard to do better than >> Karatsuba multiplication... > > "Not that hard" depends on your background. Granted, but while my background is maths it's not numerics and I know where to find descriptions and implementations of complexity-wise better algorithms. Using them is just a matter of engineering, right? <wink> > The idea is to bury Dan under esoteric algorithms from a huge number > of obscure specialties <wink>. Now there's a plan! Let's see, how do we do that? Excessive use of dicts, unicode esoterica and multiple inheritance seems like a good start. Cheers, mwh -- Its unmanageable complexity has spawned more fear-preventing tools than any other language, but the solution _should_ have been to create and use a language that does not overload the whole goddamn human brain with irrelevant details. -- Erik Naggum, comp.lang.lisp
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4