From: "Joel Young" <jdy@cs.brown.edu>
Richard,
From: "Richard Peters" <r.a.peters@student.tue.nl>
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 cln::cl_RA
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.
Joel
I guess you can't use boost::rational<cln::cl_I> for comparison here? I noticed that my division algorithm can be quite slow in some instances. When dividing an integer by another, it first makes a guess and then starts subtracting in a loop (around line 318 in big_integer_impl.hpp). It should refine its first guess in a more subtle way, but implementing that is still a todo item. I'll let you know when it is done. Besides from that, the rest of the code also hasn't seen much optimization yet, so the problem may be somewhere else. best regards, Richard Peters