On Fri, 26 Feb 2016 09:20:58 +0100 FRIGN <d...@frign.de> wrote: > On Fri, 26 Feb 2016 09:11:20 +0100 > Mattias Andrée <maand...@kth.se> wrote: > > Hey Mattias, > > > Well, that is pain in the ass. > > I know Matlab is a pain in the ass, but it's going to be > academia mostly who would be "eligible" to use factor(1) > for something. > What I could live with is having a naive implementation, > so John Doe can just type "factor 1831" quickly and see > the result. > If you want to crack large primes, use something more > tailored for the job. > > We had the same mindset "implementing" sort -m, which > merges already sorted files without storing them. > We just sort them anyway, which kind of defeats the > purpose of the flag, but such a simple solution is valid > for 99% of the cases and we still have the chance to do > it "right" in a simple way. > > > I'm actually using factor. And it is in base systems, so > > I think it should be included, but I will be simplifying > > it. > > What are you using it for? To test the primes in your > favourite RSA-algorithm?
Mostly random things, but regularly when I correct maths tests. > I will personally not sign any patch that includes gmp, > tommath or pthreads or any other abominations of mankind. > I don't think either that anybody here would agree on > merging a single tool literally nobody uses if it > includes these insane dependencies. > I know there is "need" for a suckless bignum library, > also in the interest of implementing dc(1) or bc(1) in > the future (which are programs people actually use), > however, this has not been achieved yet. > > Cheers > > FRIGN >
pgpV2Md3Kk0w2.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
