Re: Notice: My 2nd crypto book finished :-)

mm wrote:
Strange. If I want a library that implements well
known constructs, I'd really want it written by
someone who cares about careful, correct, and
efficient programs, rather than by an abstract
mathematician who doesn't care that input might be
malformed, outside the proper range, or how long
it takes to come up with the answer.

But who did talk about "abstract mathematician?" Did I say such a thing?

I think Greg's point is despite the lack of advance degrees in
mathematics, a competent software library can still be constructed.
That it takes more than competence in one single area to be a well
rounded and respected individual.

I only say that a computer scientist who wants to work in the crypto
domain should have a minimal knowledge in maths. And that's totally
obvious. Look at any CS cursus (with a specialization in crypto) of any
university.

I'd say I have more than a minimal knowledge in math. I sure as heck
can talk circles around the average lay person and I have held my own
in the professional circuit. If you didn't have an agenda you'd be
able to see your bias and get over yourself.

Now, I'm not much of a mathematician myself, but
I'm a good coder and know one when I see one. Tom
writes good code.

I don't know if I am a good coder but I will never say that someone who
codes a Jacobi function (with big integer parameters) as a recursive
function is a good coder.

Why is it bad? How many times will it recurse? Do you suppose I
haven't fixed that because I haven't found a need to yet?

Again, this boils down to your lack of experience working in the field.
LTM has a bunch of goals, least of all is a fast and memory stable
Jacobi function. I mean what good would that be if it took 8 minutes
to multiply a 64-bit number? There are areas I had to focus on
[including code readability, documentation and that book that goes with
the archive].

Maybe after you write as much as I do we can judge how flawless your
work is.

Well, we are talking about his work because he put it on the table. As
usual, each time someone nitpicks about his behaviour, he immediately
hides himself behind his work, "I contribute, I have millions of users",
etc. etc. What is curious is that he uses his work as a shield and he
is always surprised when his work get blows.

I accept patches, fixes, and comments from many people. The real
question is, why haven't you, with all your myriad of experience and
talent, contributed a patch to LTM that fixes this problem?

You're the only one who seems to think I'm a close minded individual
who doesn't accept help from others. You also have not submitted any
patches yet. Odd...

<snip>

I'll let Greg respond to that [if he choose to indulge you any
further...]

Tom

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Notice: My 2nd crypto book finished :-)
    ... Tom St Denis a écrit: ... someone who cares about careful, correct, and ... I'm a good coder and know one when I see one. ... codes a Jacobi function as a recursive ...
    (sci.crypt)
  • Re: Factoring paper is wrong
    ... > listed as a mathematician. ... Care to draw more conclusions? ... Who knows who cares? ... Time to get Grampa Simpson to review your code. ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: A new definition of natural numbers
    ... Eckard Blumschein wrote: ... Not by modern standards. ... to listening to Bach or Rachmaninoff, and that's all a mathematician ... in the meantime, who cares?! ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: Cantor Confusion
    ... Another mathematician who cares about disciplinary thinking. ... dik t. ...
    (sci.math)