[Nickle] Fwd: nickle slow for large factorials

Keith Packard keithp at keithp.com
Mon Jul 5 21:35:34 PDT 2010

On Sun, 4 Jul 2010 11:32:46 +0200, Michel Alexandre Salim <michael.silvanus at gmail.com> wrote:

> It looks like Nickle's handling of bignums is inefficient -- has there
> been thoughts about using GMP for large numbers? The tail recursion
> itself is fine, even for mutually recursive functions:

I've implemented a more efficient factorial function as described by
Peter Luschny as described here:


This still isn't amazingly fast for large factorials (666666 takes a bit
more than a minute), but is a whole lot faster than the naïve algorithm
originally included in nickle, and should be faster than the GMP
factorial algorithm for large values, although I haven't compared it

This code is on the master branch in the nickle repository; please feel
free to give it a try.

keith.packard at intel.com
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: </pipermail/nickle/attachments/20100706/05ac8440/attachment.pgp>

More information about the Nickle mailing list