Used gmpy2 functions instead of the standard ones or the while-loops implemented in Python #2
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
…andard ones or implemented in Python via the while-loops
|
Thanks a lot! Will look at it soon. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
The gmpy2 functions are from 50% to up to 400% faster. You can run your own benchmarks or run https://github.com/maximmasiutin/rsa-common-modulus/blob/main/test/benchmark-libs.py to find the real difference on your computer. I've run my tests on a notebook with Intel Core i7 1065G7 (AVX-512), gmpy2 version: 2.1.0b3, Python version: 3.8.5.
The most significant difference is between the gmpy2 invert(a, b) and Python's pow(a, -1, b).