[Haskell-beginners] Question about time consume when calculate prime numbers
Lorenzo Bolla
lbolla at gmail.com
Wed Sep 12 14:41:41 CEST 2012
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 1:17 PM, Yi Cheng <chengyidna at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Thanks for answering my question, but I'm still confused by some details.
> I don't quite agree with you that Eratosthenes algorithm must be
> implemented with a complexity of O(n^2) in space. When the n is used to
> calculate the primes below it, it can be implemented in space complexity
> O(n). For example, in languages, like C/C++, we can allocate a array. So I
> think the the complexity of O(n^2) in space you mentioned, is the
> complexity of "the beautiful code". So here's the question, can
> Eratosthenes algorithm be implemented in a more gentle way?
>
Correct: I referred to your implementation. See here (
http://www.haskell.org/haskellwiki/Prime_numbers#Sieve_of_Eratosthenes) for
many different (and more efficient) implementations of Eratosthenes.
Then I think maybe there is a more beautiful and practical way to implement
> it.
> One method of mine is trying to judge whether a number is a prime just by
> the primes less than it, such as if the greatest common divisor of the
> number and the product of the primes less than it equals to 1. But the
> product of the primes is too large.
>
> So I wander if there is a concise method to solve the problem with a
> faster method. In my C++ version, the Eratosthenes is implemented in linear
> space complexity, and optimize in filtering the numbers which can be
> divided by a prime. This code is faster than the original algorithm
> implemented by me(It was also implemented it in C++, and slower than the
> following code).
> I know, when writing Haskell code, it would be better to forget some
> experience in command-line language, but I want to know whether there is a
> faster method to solve the problem.
>
>
> Thank you.
> Yi. Cheng
>
> The code in my c++ version.
> #include <iostream>
> using namespace std;
> int main(){
> int p[2000000] = {0};
> long sum = 0;
> int f = 1;
> for(long i=2; i <= 2000000; ++i){
> if(p[i] == 0){
> sum += i;
> for(long j = i * i; j < 2000000; j += i)
> p[j] = 1;
> }
> }
> cout<<sum<<endl;
> return 0;
>
> }
>
>
This implementation looks like the one here:
http://www.haskell.org/haskellwiki/Prime_numbers#From_Squares, with the
difference that in C++ you are modifying your array in-place instead of
generating it lazily. It's not equivalent to your "beautiful" version in
Haskell.
hth,
L.
> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 5:26 PM, Lorenzo Bolla <lbolla at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 9:06 AM, Yi Cheng <chengyidna at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Recently, I'm trying to solve some problems in project euler using
>>> haskell. When it came to problem 10, calculating the sum of all primes
>>> below 20000000, I try to write a program which can generate primes.
>>> In my memory Eratosthenes is faster than just whether a number can be
>>> divided by the number less then the square root of it.
>>> Firstly, I wrote the following programs:
>>>
>>> module Main where
>>> isPrime x = isPrime' 3 x (round . sqrt. fromIntegral $ x)
>>> isPrime' d target maxd
>>> | d > maxd = True
>>> | mod target d == 0 = False
>>> | otherwise = isPrime' (d + 2) target maxd
>>>
>>> main = print $ (sum (filter isPrime [3,5..2000000]) + 2)
>>>
>>> And it consume about 11s in my computer.
>>> Then, I tried to figure out how to solve the problem by Eratosthenes,
>>> but failed. Later, I find a program implemented by others, meeting my
>>> purpose and I've used it to solve the problem:
>>>
>>> primes :: [Int]
>>> primes = primes' [2..]
>>>
>>> primes' :: [Int] -> [Int]
>>> primes' [] = []
>>> primes' (n:ns) = n : primes' (filter (\v -> v `mod` n /= 0) ns)
>>>
>>> solve x = sum $ primes' [2..x]
>>>
>>> main = print $ solve 2000000
>>>
>>> Well, although the code is beautiful, it is slow. Even waiting for a
>>> minute, no answer was printed.
>>>
>>> In C version, Eratosthenes is faster than the method implemented in my
>>> earlier code, which only consume 0.3s(the earlier method consume 1.6s).
>>>
>>> So I want to know, why Eratosthenes implemented in Haskell is slow than
>>> the ugly code implemented by me.
>>> Could anyone tell me?
>>>
>>>
>> Eratosthenes's complexity is O(n^2) (both space and time), whereas the
>> "ugly" one has a sub-quadratic running complexity and linear in space.
>>
>> Try to profile them:
>> $> ghc -O2 --make -prof -auto-all <filename>
>> $> ./primes +RTS -p -hc
>> $> hp2ps primes.hp
>>
>> You'll see that most of the time is spent allocating space which is never
>> released.
>> You could play a bit with strictness, but the main problem is the awful
>> complexity of the algorithm.
>>
>> hth,
>> L.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> Thank you
>>> Yi Cheng
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Beginners mailing list
>>> Beginners at haskell.org
>>> http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/beginners
>>>
>>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.haskell.org/pipermail/beginners/attachments/20120912/200803fd/attachment.htm>
More information about the Beginners
mailing list