From: Joel Young (jdy_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-04-30 10:23:47
From: "Richard Peters" <r.a.peters_at_[hidden]>
> I managed to get the code to compile by adding 'explicit' to the constructor
> on line 132 of big_integer.hpp.
That fix worked, in that my code compiles and runs. The catch is now
that the code is at least two orders of magnitude slower using
boost::rational<boost::big_integer> for the core data_t vs using
if I run using double as the data_t my alg takes 0.14 seconds cpu. with
cln::cl_RA it takes 90 seconds cpu, with
boost::rational<boost::big_integer> it is taking more than 40 minutes
and is still running (less than 1/3 complete). I'll let it run through
lunch, and then if it is still churning, I'll break it and check if it
is stuck in a loop.
I am working with numbers extremely close to zero so I can't challenging
problems for exact solutions with boost::rational<long long> to get
a timing comparison to see if rational is the bottleneck or big_integer.
The work done up to the point where the running program is stuck at now
checks out as exactly correct.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk