Front page | perl.golf |
Postings from August 2002
In article <3D51FEBC.906@clotho.com>,
Chris Dolan <chris@clotho.com> writes:
> Eugene van der Pijll wrote:
>>
>> Unfortunately, his solution doesn't seem to work here.
>>
>> $ cat factorial.pl
>> #!perl -l
>> $_*=$`%9e9,//for~4=~/0*$/..pop;print$`%10
>> $ perl factorial.pl 15
>> 0
>> $ perl --version
>>
>> This is perl, v5.6.1 built for alpha-dec_osf
>>
>> Can someone explain, please?
>>
>
> It's a 32- vs 64- bit thing. On a 32-bit box, ~4 == 4294967291 (which
> ends in "1"). On a 64 bit alpha, it is different.
>
Ok, the rules says the solution has to work on all architectures, so
it should in fact work on 64-bit machines. So his solution is invalid.
However, we as referees should have caught this.
Juho originally had +1 there, and only changed it to ~4 when hunting the
best tie break. So I'm going to apply referees discretion and behave as if
his top entry is
#!perl -l
$_*=$`%9e9,??for+1=~?0*$?..pop;print$`%10
which is certainly what he would have submitted if the refs had caught ~4.
This gives
factorial.pl: 44.1212 strokes (ok)
postorder.pl: 51.0831 strokes (ok)
-------
total: 95.2044 strokes
which is still ahead of Eugene, so i think it's fair to still award Juho
first place. Hopefully everybody will see this as acceptable.
(and BoB falls back to
#!perl -l
$_*=$`%9e9,??for??=~?0*$?..pop;print$`%10
which scores 44.1175)
Thread Previous
|
Thread Next