Personal tools

Talk:Prime numbers

From HaskellWiki

(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
(An interesting thought)
 
m
Line 8: Line 8:
   
 
[[User:MathematicalOrchid|MathematicalOrchid]] 16:41, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
 
[[User:MathematicalOrchid|MathematicalOrchid]] 16:41, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
  +
  +
a composite can indeed have factors greater than its square root, and indeed most do. what you mean is that a composite will definitely have at least one factor smaller-equal than its square root.
  +
  +
why not use <hask>(\x -> n > x*x)</hask> --[[User:JohannesAhlmann|Johannes Ahlmann]] 21:18, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Revision as of 21:18, 5 February 2007

Here's an interesting question: will the program go faster if we replace all those
(n >)
expressions with
(\x -> floor (sqrt n) > x)
?

On one hand, a composite integer cannot possess a factor greater than its square root.

On the other hand, since the list we're looking through contains all possible prime numbers, we are guaranteed to find a factor or an exact match eventually, so do we need the
takeWhile
at all?

Throwing this over to somebody with a bigger brain than me...

MathematicalOrchid 16:41, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

a composite can indeed have factors greater than its square root, and indeed most do. what you mean is that a composite will definitely have at least one factor smaller-equal than its square root.

why not use
(\x -> n > x*x)
--Johannes Ahlmann 21:18, 5 February 2007 (UTC)