pari and lisp



FWIW, I think this shows that arithmetic (division...) with lisp is not so bad
compared with pari (although obviously this is 
**only a simple test**). 
Cf. Knuth (TAOCP vol. I) for "the worst case for Euclides' algorithm 
occurs for two consecutive
fibonacci numbers"). 

Tests in Pentium 933 linux kernel 2.4.10.

$maxima.clisp
(...snip...)
(C1) showtime:true$
Evaluation took 0.01 seconds (0.01 elapsed)
(C2) a:fibonacci(1000001)$
Evaluation took 0.00 seconds (0.00 elapsed)
(C3) a:fib(1000001)$
Evaluation took 0.69 seconds (0.69 elapsed)
(C4) b:fib(1000002)$
Evaluation took 0.68 seconds (0.69 elapsed)
(C5) gcd(a,b)$
Evaluation took 49.73 seconds (49.75 elapsed)
(C6) quit();


-------------------------while:


$./gp-dyn
                 GP/PARI CALCULATOR Version 2.1.3 (released)
                i686 running linux (ix86 kernel) 32-bit version
              (readline v4.1 enabled, extended help not available)

                       Copyright (C) 2000 The PARI Group

PARI/GP is free software, covered by the GNU General Public License, and 
comes WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY WHATSOEVER.

Type ? for help, \q to quit.
Type ?12 for how to get moral (and possibly technical) support.

   realprecision = 28 significant digits
   seriesprecision = 16 significant terms
   format = g0.28

parisize = 4000000, primelimit = 500000
? a=fibonacci(1000001);
? b=fibonacci(1000002);
? gettime();
? gcd(a,b);
? gettime() 
%5 = 206350

--------------------------------------------------------------------

I may be misusing pari, though? If so (which is likely), what should
I do?

  TA,

	Pedro Fortuny.
-- 
Pedro Fortuny Ayuso ------------->          www.maths.qmul.ac.uk/~pf
School of Mathematical Sciences.    Queen Mary College, Univ. London
Mile End Road, London E1 4NS, UK    ------>           www.qmul.ac.uk
P.Fortuny@maths.qmul.ac.uk                  Tfn. Nr. 44 20 7882 5493