[seqfan] Re: Excessive b-file, perhaps?

T. D. Noe noe at sspectra.com
Thu Nov 15 07:45:13 CET 2012

I'm in favor of the 10K limit.  For 99.9% of sequences, nothing new happens
beyond 10K.  Very few people argue for more than 10K terms.  More terms
actually obliterate the view.  I say create a GIF file of 10^5 or 10^6
terms and post that -- which I have done for some sequences.

I will continue to press for 10K terms.  If you tell people that 10K is the
limit for most sequences, they understand.  If someone want to carp, send
them to me.

Best regards,


At 9:15 PM -0500 11/14/12, Neil Sloane wrote:
>I think 200K terms are ok for that sequence. It is interesting
>enough to justify them. In fact I probably asked Hugo to
>supply them. The b-file downloads instantly for me.
>There has been too much carping about b-files recently. For
>basic sequences or others of great interest there is no reason not to have
>larger b-files than 10K terms.
>On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 9:06 PM, David Wilson <davidwwilson at comcast.net>wrote:
>> Perhaps A000959 has an unduly large b-file (200K terms).  It bogs the
>> graph, and even downloading the b-file is noticeably slower than
>> instantaneous.
>> I don't mind having the file around, but aren't 10K terms sufficient for a
>> b-file?
>> ______________________________**_________________
>> Seqfan Mailing list - http://list.seqfan.eu/
>Dear Friends, I have now retired from AT&T. New coordinates:
>Neil J. A. Sloane, President, OEIS Foundation
>11 South Adelaide Avenue, Highland Park, NJ 08904, USA
>Phone: 732 828 6098; home page: http://NeilSloane.com
>Email: njasloane at gmail.com
>Seqfan Mailing list - http://list.seqfan.eu/

More information about the SeqFan mailing list