This is a mod_perl list, so I would expect to see Perl championed
pretty heavily, but Java, .net and there ilk are undoubtedly *the*
choice for large web applications. I'd like to get into some
discussion as to why almost all *large* sites choose these languages.
I don't have any experience developing a large application in Java,
although I do have a lot of experience working on the operations side
of a large web application that is Java based.
The reasons I generally hear for choosing Java over mod_perl are:
1) Speed - I don't buy this at all
2) Maintainability - I think this makes sense. Perl can be pretty easy
to maintain if you stick a good framework around it, but you have to
seek out that framework and YOU are responsible for adhereing to it.
All of that is inherent in Java. It also helps that Java has OO built
3) Easier to package and build/move code - In my experience this is
4) Advantages to be gained from running on an actually application
server - Also valid
5) Compatible enterprise class middleware - Also true, Java plugs into
more truly enterprise level suff than Perl does. (security frameworks,
A lot of the industry seems look at Perl as obsolete technology that
has been replaced by *insert hot new technology of the week here*
which is a total shame. I've worked with a lot of technologies and I
think Perl is a great choice for small/medium websites and webapps,
which is probably what most of us work on. But I'm very interested to
know at what point (if any) a site/app grows too large or too complex
for mod_perl and what defines that turning point. Could Amazon run on
mod_perl for example?
Phil Carmody wrote:
--- On Thu, 9/17/09, Igor Chudov <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
My site algebra.com is about 80,000
lines of mod_perl code.
I wrote a relatively large framework, with many homegrown
perl modules, about five years ago.
It uses a database, image generation modules, a big
mathematical engine that I wrote (that "shows
work", unlike popular third party packages), etc.
All pages of my site are dynamic and it is very image heavy
due to math formulae.
I can say two things:
1) It is relatively fast, serving pages in 0.1 seconds or
2) Despite the quantity of code, and its age, it is still
very maintainable and understandable (to me).
In that case, would you like to fix its mangled output?
Â Â (Redirected from Prime factorization algorithm)
faster than O((1+Îµ)b) for all positive Îµ
an integer M with 1 â‰¤ M â‰¤ N
Pollard's p âˆ’ 1 algorithm
Section 4.5.4: Factoring into Primes, pp. 379â€“417.
Chapter 5: Exponential Factoring Algorithms, pp. 191â€“226. Chapter 6: Subexponential Factoring Algorithms, pp. 227â€“284. Section 7.4: Elliptic curve method, pp. 301â€“313.
Eric W. Weisstein, â€œRSA-640 Factoredâ€
v â€¢ d â€¢ e
AKS Â· APR Â· Ballieâ€“PSW Â· ECPP Â· Fermat Â· Lucas Â· Lucasâ€“Lehmer Â·
Lucasâ€“Lehmerâ€“Riesel Â· Proth's theorem Â· PÃ©pin's Â· Solovayâ€“Strassen Â· Millerâ€“Rabin Â· Trial division
Sieve of Atkin Â· Sieve of Eratosthenes Â· Sieve of Sundaram Â· Wheel factorization
CFRAC Â· Dixon's Â· ECM Â· Euler's Â· Pollard's rho Â· P âˆ’ 1 Â· P + 1 Â· QS Â· GNFS Â· SNFS Â· rational sieve Â· Fermat's Â· Shanks' square forms Â· Trial division Â· Shor's
Ancient Egyptian multiplication Â· Aryabhata Â· Binary GCD Â· Chakravala Â· Euclidean Â· Extended Euclidean Â· integer relation algorithm Â· integer square root Â· Modular exponentiation Â· Schoof's Â· Shanks-Tonelli
Looks like you've got utf8 and iso8859-1 messed up.