Nicolas Cellier wrote:
Zulq, the algorithm you are proposing is very simple but has major problems:
- it is not efficient for large size n: it will do (n factorial) loops when
only (2 raisedTo: n) are necessary
It's better than N! because it will not loop over a set already processed. For instance, for a set of 5 elements it will try 81 sets but only process 32 of these. Not 120 in either case (5 factorial).
- each loop will result in a costly hash lookup.
Your hashBlock involve LargeInteger of size (B raisedTo: p) where
It doesn't need to. That was just a very rough attempt at producing a hash that didn't evaluate to only 16 values. It should be possible to create one that produces SmallIntegers but with a higher cardinality.
- the algorithm must store all partitions even if we don't want to collect but
just to iterate on partitions.
Yes.
No offense, but you'd better not bother opening a mantis issue for this time.
Agreed. I was just curious about why the naive algorithm was so slow and then as a seperate question how one gets such changes in.
Z.