[QUOTE=storm5510;627829]You don't understand the question. OK. I will make it simpler.

Is k=1e6 the same as n=1e6?[/QUOTE]

Yes. All numeric inputs support scientific notation. They also support "g" and "m" and a few other characters.

[QUOTE=rogue;627835]Yes. All numeric inputs support scientific notation. They also support "g" and "m" and a few other characters.[/QUOTE]

I think you're still missing the question. Is k=10000 in [I]fbncsieve[/I] equivalent to n=10000 in [I]srsieve2[/I]? I was told quite a few years ago that a small n value was some gigantic number when converted to k.

I don't know how else to word this...

[QUOTE=storm5510;627840]I think you're still missing the question. Is k=10000 in [I]fbncsieve[/I] equivalent to n=10000 in [I]srsieve2[/I]? I was told quite a few years ago that a small n value was some gigantic number when converted to k.

I don't know how else to word this...[/QUOTE]

Why would the multiplier be equivalent to the exponent when talking about k*b^n-1 (or +1) forms? Since both fbncsieve and srsieve2 sieve those specific forms, the question comes across as not making sense.

Fbncsieve sieves a wide range of k. Srsieve2 sieves a wide range of n. Is that what you are asking?

To answer your question: no. They are not equivalent. 3*2^10000-1 is not the same as 10000*2^3-1. I'm not sure why the question had to be asked. The calculator in Windows would have given the answer.

[QUOTE=gd_barnes;627841]Why would the multiplier be equivalent to the exponent when talking about k*b^n-1 (or +1) forms? Since both fbncsieve and srsieve2 sieve those specific forms, the question comes across as not making sense.

Fbncsieve sieves a wide range of k. Srsieve2 sieves a wide range of n. Is that what you are asking?
[/QUOTE]

No. It is not about ranges. There is a conversion for decimal to binary. Both can be the same number, just expressed in different ways. Example: n could be 15,383 and its equivalent k could be 584,101. It's like comparing pennies to $1 paper bills. Both the same value, but don't look the same.

I will let this go. It is not important. I was just goofing to pass some time.

[QUOTE=rogue;627809]For base 2, even k are already removed, so you don't need -r. I broke this in 1.6. I will fix the code. I think I should remove -r and do that automatically. Thoughts?[/QUOTE]

I would prefer having a -r option or if -r is present by default then an include option.

[QUOTE=storm5510;627844]Example: n could be 15,383 and its equivalent k could be 584,101. It's like comparing pennies to $1 paper bills. Both the same value, but don't look the same.[/QUOTE]

This doesn't make any sense to me so I don't think you are asking the right question.

Both sieves sieve k*b^n+/-1, but fbncsieve sieves for a fixed n and variable k (expressed as a range using -k and -K). srsieve2 sieves on variable n (expressed as a range using -n and -N) for one or more k (expressed as a sequence, e.g. k*b^n+/-1)

For srsieve2 -n1e6 -N2e6 means that variable n has a value between 1000000 to 2000000.
For fbncsieve -k1e6 -K2e6 means that variable k has a value between 1000000 to 2000000.

Is he referring to something like 1024*2^n-1 == 2^(n+10)-1 ?

[QUOTE=rogue;627867][COLOR="Gray"]This doesn't make any sense to me so I don't think you are asking the right question.

Both sieves sieve k*b^n+/-1, but fbncsieve sieves for a fixed n and variable k (expressed as a range using -k and -K). srsieve2 sieves on variable n (expressed as a range using -n and -N) for one or more k (expressed as a sequence, e.g. k*b^n+/-1)[/COLOR]

[COLOR="DarkRed"][B]For srsieve2 -n1e6 -N2e6 means that variable n has a value between 1000000 to 2000000.
For fbncsieve -k1e6 -K2e6 means that variable k has a value between 1000000 to 2000000.[/QUOTE][/B][/COLOR]

The highlighted above is [U]exactly[/U] what I was looking for. Both are numerically weighted the same. It would appear that I was being led-by-the-nose years ago when I was told they were not.

[I]Many thanks, and apologies for the confusion![/I] :smile:

The error below happens with an inline series, but not with an "abcd" input file.

Example:
[CODE]fbncsieve -k 3 -K 1000000 -p 3 -P 1e10 -W 6 -s "k*1061955^6+1" -o 1e10.abcd[/CODE]

Result:
[CODE]fbncsieve v1.6, a program to find factors of k*b^n+c numbers for fixed b, n, and c and variable k
Sieve started: 3 < p < 1e10 with 499999 terms (3 < k < 1000000, k*1061955^6+1) (expecting 476143 factors)
Increasing worksize to 400000 since each chunk is tested in less than a second
Increasing worksize to 10000000 since each chunk is tested in less than a second
Increasing worksize to 50000000 since each chunk is tested in less than a second
Sieve completed at p=10171501019.
CPU time: 52.31 sec. (2.78 sieving) (4.89 cores)
[B]Fatal Error: Something is wrong. Counted terms (26337) != expected terms (26336)[/B][/CODE]

If I repeat the example line, the counted and expected terms on the bottom line are different each time. The same occurs if I change the series in the example line.

[U]Sorry![/U]

[QUOTE=storm5510;627939]The error below happens with an inline series, but not with an "abcd" input file.

Example:
[CODE]fbncsieve -k 3 -K 1000000 -p 3 -P 1e10 -W 6 -s "k*1061955^6+1" -o 1e10.abcd[/CODE]

Result:
[CODE]fbncsieve v1.6, a program to find factors of k*b^n+c numbers for fixed b, n, and c and variable k
Sieve started: 3 < p < 1e10 with 499999 terms (3 < k < 1000000, k*1061955^6+1) (expecting 476143 factors)
Increasing worksize to 400000 since each chunk is tested in less than a second
Increasing worksize to 10000000 since each chunk is tested in less than a second
Increasing worksize to 50000000 since each chunk is tested in less than a second
Sieve completed at p=10171501019.
CPU time: 52.31 sec. (2.78 sieving) (4.89 cores)
[B]Fatal Error: Something is wrong. Counted terms (26337) != expected terms (26336)[/B][/CODE]

If I repeat the example line, the counted and expected terms on the bottom line are different each time. The same occurs if I change the series in the example line.

[U]Sorry![/U][/QUOTE]

I will take a look. It shouldn't be too hard to fix.

[QUOTE=rogue;627940]I will take a look. It shouldn't be too hard to fix.[/QUOTE]

The code is fixed and commited to sourceforge. This happens only with ABCD formatted output files.