[gnuvince]

I'm still on Go 1.0.2. However, I strongly doubt that having 1.1 yields the correct result in the amount of time that the article boasts; I rewrote the program in C (direct translation), and with both clang and gcc, I get timings of around 2m05s. It's hard to believe that for a CPU-bound task, a Go program would be 200x faster than a C program.

[darkgray]

I'd agree it's dubious, but I was mostly commenting on the "correctness" of the code. It'd work on Go 1.1, so it's technically "correct". Sometimes. :)

[gnuvince]

Fair enough.