Incorrect. Notice the proof failed and even "produced counterexamples for various values of t > 64". Invalid code? No proof for you.
-
-
-
Right. That's really what I'm hoping people notice from this. When we see a proof, we have to understand what is being proved & what's not.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Even compiling the specification and running it against the test vectors is sometimes not enough. It is probably a good first step though :)
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.