[Ecm-dev] Proposal from George. Literally.

George Woltman woltman at alum.mit.edu
Lun 9 Mai 20:49:06 CEST 2005

At 03:14 PM 5/8/2005, Alexander Kruppa wrote:
>>>Should we do the normalization of Z to 1 in GMP as well?
>>That is slightly easier for me, but I can go either way.
>>Argument-wise, I'd have to return Z, but wouldn't need the number
>>being factored.
>Would you still have to link in Crandall's giantint library if your code
>does not need to do extgcds? If not, I'd say that's the route to go;
>then we wouldn't need to have two complete multiple precision libraries
>in the binary.

Unfortunately, the Crandall code will still need to be linked in.  So, I'll 
normalize the
result and if I'm summarizing the previous email correctly the interface 
will be:

int ecmStage1 (
double k,
unsigned long b,
unsigned long n,
long c,
unsigned long *num_being_factored_array,
unsigned long num_being_factored_array_len,
unsigned long B1,
unsigned long *B1done,
unsigned long *A_array,
unsigned long A_array_len,
unsigned long *x_array,
unsigned long *x_array_len,
int (*stop_check_proc)())


0 = success, but no factor
1 = factor found (during sigma->A conversion or normalization)
2 = could not handle this k,b,n,c combination
3 = out_of_memory
4 = execution halted before completion

No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.11.6 - Release Date: 5/6/2005

Plus d'informations sur la liste de diffusion Ecm-discuss