5 ms·
Ah, I read the GP as a correction that it wasn't 2^16, but 2^31 values. The "doubling" was correctly stated, but the edit said they only had 2^16 values to wor
by taeric 4y ago
Ah, I read the GP as a correction that it wasn't 2^16, but 2^31 values. The "doubling" was correctly stated, but the edit said they only had 2^16 values to work with. Almost certainly just a mistake in the post.
- rezonant 4y agoYeah I think we're all in agreement here.