View Single Post
Old 2020-11-18, 04:12   #9
paulunderwood
 
paulunderwood's Avatar
 
Sep 2002
Database er0rr

358910 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LaurV View Post
Then why the "forstep"? if the step is 1, you could just use a simple "for" which is a bit faster (internally, it uses increment instead of addition).
Edit: crosspost with Dr.S., sorry, I didn't refresh my page, from morning
It was a legacy contruction from hacking together the code, To be more efficient by far I should pre-calculate 50000000*E in the second loop!

Another speed up might be had be putting !ispseudoprime() ahead of kronecker().

Anyway, I am now running with the bound 2250000000*E and have reached a=41. The only counterexample is the aforementioned one for a=4.

Last fiddled with by paulunderwood on 2020-11-18 at 04:13
paulunderwood is offline   Reply With Quote