On Fri, 26 Feb 2016 09:11:20 +0100
Mattias Andrée <maandree_AT_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?
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
--
FRIGN <dev_AT_frign.de>
Received on Fri Feb 26 2016 - 09:20:58 CET