You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
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
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
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.
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 interestingThe text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: