Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Additional Benchmark comparison #39

Open
apmccartney opened this issue Sep 22, 2018 · 1 comment
Open

Additional Benchmark comparison #39

apmccartney opened this issue Sep 22, 2018 · 1 comment

Comments

@apmccartney
Copy link

The mp++ library is considered by many to be the state of the art for performant multiprecision integer arithmetic and underlies the symengine library behind the popular sympy python symbolic mathematics library.

A performance comparison to ctbugnum would be very interesting

@niekbouman
Copy link
Owner

Dear Austin, @apmccartney

Thank you for your comment.
I am aware of the existence of mp++, but haven't used it myself.
With ctbignum, I am focusing on compile-time computations and run-time computations with integers whose limb size are known at compile time, and modular arithmetic with a modulus known at compile-time.
I specifically target on operands with a few hundred bits (say, two to four 64-bit limbs), whereas mp++ seems to focus on implementing a "small-vector optimization" for big integers of arbitrary size.

What is your use case if I may ask?
General yet fair performance comparisons are always a bit hard to make, a benchmark targeted to a specific use case could be more insightful.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants