Front page | perl.fwp |
Postings from March 2002
Re: TPR1 post-mortem
Thread Previous
|
Thread Next
From:
Marcelo E. Magallon
Date:
March 8, 2002 00:34
Subject:
Re: TPR1 post-mortem
Message ID:
20020308073107.GA399@ysabell.wh.vaih
Hats off to Ton and Lars!
>> Ton Hospel <fun_with_perl@ton.iguana.be> writes:
> -l $_=pop;s;.;print,s,,$&*1.11%10if/\G../,eg;eg
Wow. My last fumblings where something along the lines of:
-l $_=pop;0while+print,s+.+$&*111%100if/../+eg,chop
which I couldn't get to work.
Perhaps as post-mortem regarding that discussion about the tiebreaker,
I was wondering how you guys got rid of the while. I guessed there
wasn't a while involved because I thought "there's got to be a pop, a
print, certainly an s with e and g". If figured the best solution
didn't had a while in it since in mine that uses 7 strokes with 6 \w's.
The above solution also uses 7 strokes for the "same" purpose
(side-effects aside, which is the killer), but the tie-breaker is
lower.
The 1.11%10 bit made me giggle for some reason.
Regarding my "one step" solution, the secret can be computed as:
Op(i=1..digits, C(i, digits)*digit[i])
where Op(a,b) := (0, 1..9, 1..9, ...)[a+b] and C(i, j) := j!/i!/(j-i)!
(or something like that, I can't think straight right now). This lead
to a horribly long solution that doesn't even pass the test program :-)
Thanks guys, my first tournament ever was lots of fun!
--
Marcelo
Thread Previous
|
Thread Next