Register FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

2018-01-25, 19:44   #1387
Serpentine Vermin Jar

Jul 2014

29×113 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by retina Only if JS is enabled...
LOL... not that again. I mean, you also need a computer and power to run it, but you don't hear the Luddites complaining.

2018-01-25, 19:52   #1388
retina
Undefined

"The unspeakable one"
Jun 2006
My evil lair

7×827 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Madpoo LOL... not that again. I mean, you also need a computer and power to run it, but you don't hear the Luddites complaining.
Yup.
• Electricity: Good
• Computers: Good
• Random code from random people: Not so good.

 2018-01-26, 04:48 #1389 LaurV Romulan Interpreter     Jun 2011 Thailand 100010100001012 Posts Actually there is nothing wrong with retinas's suggestion, to direct display of the cofactors if they meet some condition, for example if they "fit the screen" - I just checked and a c90 fits, but a c101 does not (it inserts an additional line, with a single digit on it, when clicked) - so most probably the field size will accommodate a c100. So, the cofactors smaller than a c100 should be displayed without the need of the additional mouse move and click, and the larger one still can be shown like Pxxx (please note there is no dash in the middle, I hate the dash, P-33 looks extremely strange for me, is that a prime with a negative number of digits, or what? And why you don't use dash for Mxxx, if the logic is so? Like say M-757 instead of M757...Grrr... Be constant man, NO DASHES! ) possibly followed by a comment (like "click me!"), as long as there is no indication that the Pxxxx can be clicked... And of course, if I was silly enough to click a Pxxxxxxxxxxxxx and my screen is filled with billions of meaningless numbers, needing hours of scroll up and down, there is no way to go back, without reloading the page, which takes time... Put a link to the expanded number too, to contract back when clicked... This way, it should be easier, cofactors smaller than c100 start expanded, larger start contracted. The user can flip each of them by clicking it. hehe... (I know, we always want too much...) (and don't tell me I can press the "end" and "home" keys on the keyboard, I know ) Last fiddled with by LaurV on 2018-01-26 at 05:05
2018-01-26, 14:06   #1390
James Heinrich

"James Heinrich"
May 2004
ex-Northern Ontario

11·283 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by LaurV * cofactors smaller than a c100 should be displayed * NO DASHES! * The user can flip each of them by clicking it * if I was silly enough to click a Pxxxxxxxxxxxxx and my screen is filled
These specific point have been addressed.

 2018-01-27, 04:49 #1391 LaurV Romulan Interpreter     Jun 2011 Thailand 100010100001012 Posts You are my man, I knew it! It really looks much better now. (Except for retina who can not run JS, hehe... in fact, I don't know if I am running JS either, I think newer browsers have newer tools, covering the same stuff, but more secure, but well, it is not my domain... I am happy with my Firefox). A small observation tho: (you didn't believe you get out of it so easy, did you?) When I hover the mouse over the "Pxxx", there is a small question mark getting attached to the tail of the mouse, making my mouse terrible shocked, he scratches itself with the left leg behind right ear, but to no avail, because neither the right click nor the left click does something with that question mark. We expected to click and/or see a help or a tool-tip, or something. It seems just a relic from some older design of the page? Last fiddled with by LaurV on 2018-01-27 at 04:51
 2018-01-27, 12:17 #1392 James Heinrich     "James Heinrich" May 2004 ex-Northern Ontario 11·283 Posts The help-icon-cursor indicates that there's a tooltip available, if you hover over "Pxxx" for a second you should see the tooltip that says "definitely-prime cofactor with xxx decimal digits" (for "PRPyyy" it would replace "definitely" with "probably"). If you think it more annoying than intuitive I can remove the special cursor.
 2018-01-28, 12:32 #1393 LaurV Romulan Interpreter     Jun 2011 Thailand 8,837 Posts No, do not remove anything. It is totally fine, after a "hard refresh" of the page, the tooltips appear properly. There was no tooltip before, and I remembered I had troubles in the past with hard-refreshing your page. You told me in the past about it. After the right keys pressed, it works well. We are good here. Thanks a lot. Last fiddled with by LaurV on 2018-01-28 at 12:32
 2018-02-03, 23:03 #1394 VictordeHolland     "Victor de Hollander" Aug 2011 the Netherlands 100100101102 Posts The manual result interpreter is acting weird: I reported 16 factors today, in the form of: Code: [Fri Feb 02 18:41:11 2018] M24168631 has a factor: 410953947929229858623 [TF:68:69:mfaktc 0.21 barrett76_mul32_gs] [Fri Feb 02 18:41:31 2018] found 1 factor for M24168631 from 2^68 to 2^69 [mfaktc 0.21 barrett76_mul32_gs] And it interprets the factor correctly, but the second line as no factor found Like https://www.mersenne.org/report_expo...exp_hi=&full=1 These are the 16 exponents/factors that were affected: Code: Manual testing 24203141 F 2018-02-03 22:48 0.0 Factor: 322306365944920950847 / TF: 68-69 0.3137 Manual testing 24199327 F 2018-02-03 22:48 0.0 Factor: 389340722021165530103 / TF: 68-69 0.9872 Manual testing 24196499 F 2018-02-03 22:48 0.0 Factor: 365270435103350185529 / TF: 68-69 0.7598 Manual testing 24196429 F 2018-02-03 22:48 0.0 Factor: 353847077266678602703 / TF: 68-69 0.6466 Manual testing 24194333 F 2018-02-03 22:48 0.0 Factor: 458347279139712572209 / TF: 68-69 1.5690 Manual testing 24193019 F 2018-02-03 22:48 0.0 Factor: 458990510147497392481 / TF: 68-69 1.5741 Manual testing 24191471 F 2018-02-03 22:48 0.0 Factor: 399696812142252603617 / TF: 68-69 1.0811 Manual testing 24190429 F 2018-02-03 22:48 0.0 Factor: 559897299892738650617 / TF: 68-69 2.2828 Manual testing 24186199 F 2018-02-03 22:48 0.0 Factor: 321309301728183128383 / TF: 68-69 0.3028 Manual testing 24184759 F 2018-02-03 22:48 0.0 Factor: 483223333502840065897 / TF: 68-69 1.7581 Manual testing 24183919 F 2018-02-03 22:48 0.0 Factor: 402050127300519458249 / TF: 68-69 1.1023 Manual testing 24181133 F 2018-02-03 22:48 0.0 Factor: 353824296758800018033 / TF: 68-69 0.6467 Manual testing 24171377 F 2018-02-03 22:48 0.0 Factor: 322419644723461498583 / TF: 68-69 0.3153 Manual testing 24170161 F 2018-02-03 22:48 0.0 Factor: 366937867134385016191 / TF: 68-69 0.7769 Manual testing 24169183 F 2018-02-03 22:47 0.0 Factor: 448904488441510170193 / TF: 68-69 1.4964 Manual testing 24168631 F 2018-02-03 22:47 0.0 Factor: 410953947929229858623 / TF: 68-69 1.1812
2018-02-04, 05:45   #1395
Serpentine Vermin Jar

Jul 2014

29·113 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by VictordeHolland The manual result interpreter is acting weird: I reported 16 factors today, in the form of: Code: [Fri Feb 02 18:41:11 2018] M24168631 has a factor: 410953947929229858623 [TF:68:69:mfaktc 0.21 barrett76_mul32_gs] [Fri Feb 02 18:41:31 2018] found 1 factor for M24168631 from 2^68 to 2^69 [mfaktc 0.21 barrett76_mul32_gs] And it interprets the factor correctly, but the second line as no factor found
What were your expectations? The manual results will parse each line as one result for one test (it ignores the date stamp lines).

The first line has an exponent, a factor, the other info about the bit range and program, all in a format that is parseable.

The 2nd line is meaningless... "found 1 factor for exponent ###" means nothing on it's own. What's the factor? Why are you telling me this? It sounds like whatever program generated that output decided to generate an extra line of useless text. Oh well.

2018-02-04, 05:50   #1396
retina
Undefined

"The unspeakable one"
Jun 2006
My evil lair

7×827 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Madpoo The 2nd line is meaningless... "found 1 factor for exponent ###" means nothing on it's own. What's the factor? Why are you telling me this? It sounds like whatever program generated that output decided to generate an extra line of useless text. Oh well.
It does tell you that the range from 2^68 to 2^69 was completed, so it is not entirely useless.

2018-02-04, 07:55   #1397
Dubslow

"Bunslow the Bold"
Jun 2011
40<A<43 -89<O<-88

719710 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Madpoo What were your expectations? The manual results will parse each line as one result for one test (it ignores the date stamp lines). The first line has an exponent, a factor, the other info about the bit range and program, all in a format that is parseable. The 2nd line is meaningless... "found 1 factor for exponent ###" means nothing on it's own. What's the factor? Why are you telling me this? It sounds like whatever program generated that output decided to generate an extra line of useless text. Oh well.
Quote:
 Originally Posted by retina It does tell you that the range from 2^68 to 2^69 was completed, so it is not entirely useless.
In particular: not only was this factor found, but it is definitively the only factor in the range.

PrimeNet does track the distinction, or at least from my years-old memories of TFing it did...

 Similar Threads Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post ewmayer Lounge 39 2015-05-19 01:08 ewmayer Science & Technology 41 2014-04-16 11:54 cheesehead Soap Box 56 2013-06-29 01:42 cheesehead Soap Box 61 2013-06-11 04:30 Dubslow Programming 19 2012-05-31 17:49

All times are UTC. The time now is 03:06.

Thu Oct 22 03:06:36 UTC 2020 up 42 days, 17 mins, 0 users, load averages: 2.05, 1.99, 1.85