Skip to main content
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [cdt-dev] Bug ID 403404

The included class file should be very close to what is needed. It is not thoroughly tested however. I did not try to fully optimize the computing but the class should provide the functionality that is needed. It is not well commented also.  May be someone can review it and test it .If something is missing or the testing fail let me know.

Regards.
Guy(See attached file: UnsignedLong.java)

Inactive hide details for Doug Schaefer ---04/05/2013 09:37:09 AM---I think you need to look at the implementation of BigIntegeDoug Schaefer ---04/05/2013 09:37:09 AM---I think you need to look at the implementation of BigInteger before claiming it's not a performance

From: Doug Schaefer <dschaefer@xxxxxxx>
To: CDT General developers list. <cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>, David Wang <kuoweiwang@xxxxxxxxx>, Sergey Prigogin <eclipse.sprigogin@xxxxxxxxx>,
Date: 04/05/2013 09:37 AM
Subject: Re: [cdt-dev] Bug ID 403404
Sent by: cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx




I think you need to look at the implementation of BigInteger before claiming it's not a performance problem. At the very least, it's really big.

It's easy to imagine a much more performant and small implementation if you know how many bits you're trying to handle. For example, with 128-bits, you can use double word algorithms are as old as I am and maximize performance.

Doug.

From: <Oberhuber>, Martin <Martin.Oberhuber@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-To: "CDT General developers list." <cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Friday, 5 April, 2013 8:51 AM
To: David Wang <kuoweiwang@xxxxxxxxx>, "CDT General developers list." <cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Sergey Prigogin <eclipse.sprigogin@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [cdt-dev] Bug ID 403404

StackOverflow recommends BigInteger and doesn’t talk about inefficiency.
 
Starting with BigInteger now, it should be fairly straightforward to refactor into a different class with the same API later (ie simple search & replace on the name BigInteger and the import statements for its package). That is, only if performance measurement shows that it’s in fact a problem.
 
Or are you concerned that the API of BigInteger is already inefficient ? – Are you concerned about memory size or performance ?
 
Thanks,
Martin
--
Martin Oberhuber, SMTS / Product Architect – Development Tools, Wind River
direct +43.662.457915.85  fax +43.662.457915.6
 
    From: cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of David Wang
    Sent:     Wednesday, April 03, 2013 1:39 AM
    To:     Sergey Prigogin
    Cc:     CDT General developers list.
    Subject:     Re: [cdt-dev] Bug ID 403404
     
    I would hope we can simply use the BigInteger for now even though its inefficient. But at least this stuff would
    work. At the same time we can look into a more solid solution.
     
    Thanks
     
    From: Sergey Prigogin <eclipse.sprigogin@xxxxxxxxx>
    To:     David Wang <kuoweiwang@xxxxxxxxx>
    Cc:     CDT General developers list. <cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
    Sent:     Tuesday, April 2, 2013 4:18 PM
    Subject:     Re: [cdt-dev] Bug ID 403404
     
    Good opportunity for somebody to contribute one.
     
    -sergey
     
    On Tue, Apr 2, 2013 at 4:15 PM, David Wang <kuoweiwang@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
    Not that I am aware of.
     
    From: Sergey Prigogin <eclipse.sprigogin@xxxxxxxxx>
    To:     David Wang <kuoweiwang@xxxxxxxxx>
    Cc: CDT General developers list. <cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
    Sent:     Tuesday, April 2, 2013 4:12 PM

    Subject:     Re: [cdt-dev] Bug ID 403404
     
    Oh, I see. I didn't notice the bug number in the subject. Do you know of an open source Java implementation of 128-bit integers with EPL-compatible license? I'd like to avoid BigInteger since it's too heavy and inefficient.
     
    -sergey
     
    On Tue, Apr 2, 2013 at 4:02 PM, David Wang <kuoweiwang@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
    Thanks. I already filed a bug and the ID on the subject. Do you want me to create another one?
     
    I wonder what is the outlook for the bug, my code needs this thing to work.
     
    Thanks again
     
    From: Sergey Prigogin <eclipse.sprigogin@xxxxxxxxx>
    To:     David Wang <kuoweiwang@xxxxxxxxx>; CDT General developers list. <cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
    Sent:     Tuesday, April 2, 2013 3:52 PM
    Subject:     Re: [cdt-dev] Bug ID 403404
     
    This is most likely caused by the fact that ULONG_MAX cannot be represented by a Java long. Could you please file a bug.
     
    -sergey
     
    On Tue, Apr 2, 2013 at 3:42 PM, David Wang <kuoweiwang@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
    Hi
     
    I discussed some potential eclipse indexing error at
     
    http://www.eclipse.org/forums/index.php/m/1022322/#msg_1022322
     
    It seems to be a bug in eclipse. I created a bug last month. Can someone please help and confirm
    if this is an eclipse bug? and/or will it be fixed shortly?
    Thanks a lot, my code heavily relies on this to be working correctly...
    David
     

    _______________________________________________
    cdt-dev mailing list
    cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
    https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cdt-dev
     
     
     
     
     
     _______________________________________________
    cdt-dev mailing list
    cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
    https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cdt-dev

DISCLAIMER: Privileged and/or Confidential information may be contained in this message. If you are not the addressee of this message, you may not copy, use or deliver this message to anyone. In such event, you should destroy the message and kindly notify the sender by reply e-mail. It is understood that opinions or conclusions that do not relate to the official business of the company are neither given nor endorsed by the company. Thank You.

GIF image

Attachment: UnsignedLong.java
Description: Binary data

Back to the top