this post was submitted on 02 Dec 2024
14 points (100.0% liked)

NotAwfulTech

385 readers
4 users here now

a community for posting cool tech news you don’t want to sneer at

non-awfulness of tech is not required or else we wouldn’t have any posts

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

copy pasting the rules from last year's thread:

Rules: no spoilers.

The other rules are made up aswe go along.

Share code by link to a forge, home page, pastebin (Eric Wastl has one here) or code section in a comment.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (6 children)

Day 7

1 and 2On reflection, it was a pretty fun little problem to solve. There wasn't much of a difference between the two parts. I ran into some bugs with my recursion termination conditions, but I got them in the end.

Part 1. A quick look at the data showed that the input length was short enough to perform an O(2^n^) search with some early exits. I coded it as a dfs.

Part 2. Adding concatenation just changes the base from 2 to 3, which, while strictly slower, wasn't much slower for this input.

code

void d7(bool sub) => print(getLines()
    .map((l) => l.split(RegExp(r':? ')).map(int.parse).toList())
    .fold<int>(
        0, (p, ops) => test(ops, ops[0], ops[1], 2, sub) ? ops[0] + p : p));

bool test(List<int> l, int cal, int cur, int i, bool sub) =>
    cur == cal && i == l.length ||
    (i < l.length && cur <= cal) &&
        (test(l, cal, cur + l[i], i + 1, sub) ||
            test(l, cal, cur * l[i], i + 1, sub) ||
            (sub && test(l, cal, cur.concat(l[i]), i + 1, sub)));

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (5 children)

Re: day 7 parts 1 and 2

same here, I was dicking around with combinatorics to get all combos of plus and multiply but realized before I got to the end it was gonna take too long. Then I figured that a DFS was the way to go.

I tried to optimize a bit by exiting early if the cumulative result became too large, but for some reason that gave me incorrect (too low) answers. Part 2 runs in around 1 min anyway.

https://github.com/gustafe/aoc2024/blob/main/d07-Bridge-Repair.pl

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

re: branch cuttingIDK if this is what your issue was, but one thing I ran into was that if you do something like if (current_total >= target) prune(), this can be problematic because if the tail end of the data is 0s and 1s, you exit too early. Basically I would prune strictly when the current total > target.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

re: branch cutting

thanks for the tip, I looked into it again and I found I was cutting in the wrong place. Fixed now, and halves the time for part 2

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 week ago

We love to see it

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)