Reputation: 8023
I have the following code which spits out prime numbers between 1 and N. A friend came up with this solution but I believe there is a more efficient way to write this code. Such as making it so that if (i%j!=0) {System.out.print (i + " ");}
. However I found this spat out numbers randomly all over the place...
import java.util.Scanner;
public class AllPrime {
public static void main(String[] args) {
System.out.println("Enter a number:\n");
Scanner input = new Scanner(System.in);
int a = input.nextInt();
for (int i = 2; i < a; i++) {
boolean primeNum = true;
for(int j=2; j<i; j++) {
if (i%j==0) {
primeNum =false;
}
}
if (primeNum) {
System.out.print(i + " ");
}
}
}
}
Upvotes: 1
Views: 2133
Reputation: 36269
public static boolean [] createPrimes (final int MAX)
{
boolean [] primes = new boolean [MAX];
// Make only odd numbers kandidates...
for (int i = 3; i < MAX; i+=2)
{
primes[i] = true;
}
// ... except No. 2
primes[2] = true;
for (int i = 3; i < MAX; i+=2)
{
/*
If a number z is already eliminated
(like No. 9), because it is a multiple of -
for example 3, then all multiples of z
are already eliminated.
*/
if (primes[i] && i < MAX/i)
{
int j = i * i;
while (j < MAX)
{
if (primes[j])
primes[j] = false;
j+=2*i;
}
}
}
return primes;
}
Improves the speed to about 2/1, it checks 100 Million ints in 5s on my 2Ghz single core.
Upvotes: 1
Reputation: 1331
private static void generatePrimes(int maxNum) {
boolean[] isPrime = new boolean[maxNum + 1];
for (int i = 2; i <= maxNum; i++)
isPrime[i] = true;
// mark non-primes <= N using Sieve of Eratosthenes
for (int i = 2; i * i <= Math.sqrt(maxNum); i++) {
// if i is prime, then mark multiples of i as nonprime
if (isPrime[i]) {
for (int j = i; i * j <= maxNum; j++)
isPrime[i * j] = false;
}
}
// count primes
int primes = 0;
for (int i = 2; i <= maxNum; i++)
if (isPrime[i]) {
System.out.println("Prime - " + i);
primes++;
}
System.out.println("The number of primes <= " + maxNum + " is "+ primes);
}
Upvotes: -1
Reputation: 262850
for(int j=2; j<i; j++) {
if (i%j==0) {
primeNum =false;
}
}
This is not a very efficient algorithm, but at the very least, put a break
in there...
Upvotes: 1
Reputation: 1802
Look at proper sieves, like the Sieve of Eratosthenes. You don't need to be checking for %
each time.
Upvotes: 4