#97171 - 2002-12-24 06:16 PM
Re: KiXGolf: Burrows-Wheeler Transform
|
Howard Bullock
KiX Supporter
Registered: 2000-09-15
Posts: 5809
Loc: Harrisburg, PA USA
|
I am sorry to here that, but
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#97174 - 2002-12-24 07:08 PM
Re: KiXGolf: Burrows-Wheeler Transform
|
Howard Bullock
KiX Supporter
Registered: 2000-09-15
Posts: 5809
Loc: Harrisburg, PA USA
|
maciep, I can't wait to see your code. Small code + fast Don't get get it too small though
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#97176 - 2002-12-24 07:13 PM
Re: KiXGolf: Burrows-Wheeler Transform
|
Howard Bullock
KiX Supporter
Registered: 2000-09-15
Posts: 5809
Loc: Harrisburg, PA USA
|
Now I'm upset
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#97178 - 2002-12-24 08:08 PM
Re: KiXGolf: Burrows-Wheeler Transform
|
Shawn
Administrator
Registered: 1999-08-13
Posts: 8611
|
I just double-checked my 226 and it ran fine ! Theres no way im running the biggy on this though ...
maciep - do you have a slow 226 or a fast 226 ?
[edit] re-read the thread - guess that would be a fast 226 - Howard, looks as if both you and I are going to need a new hat [ 24. December 2002, 20:12: Message edited by: Shawn ]
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#97180 - 2002-12-24 08:24 PM
Re: KiXGolf: Burrows-Wheeler Transform
|
Howard Bullock
KiX Supporter
Registered: 2000-09-15
Posts: 5809
Loc: Harrisburg, PA USA
|
It's back to brain storming... (trial and error)
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#97182 - 2002-12-24 09:55 PM
Re: KiXGolf: Burrows-Wheeler Transform
|
Howard Bullock
KiX Supporter
Registered: 2000-09-15
Posts: 5809
Loc: Harrisburg, PA USA
|
My slow method has now been running on the 749 byte string for 18+ hours.
220 My brain has been fried switching back and forth on these two methods. Can I do this in Perl please
I haven't given up yet. [ 24. December 2002, 21:55: Message edited by: Howard Bullock ]
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#97186 - 2002-12-25 04:01 AM
Re: KiXGolf: Burrows-Wheeler Transform
|
kholm
Korg Regular
Registered: 2000-06-19
Posts: 714
Loc: Randers, Denmark
|
Stil not in contest I have implemented the 'hard' way = 'fast' way This brought my score up to 586 (more than double the smallest in contest ) But the time for the executing the long string (749) got down to 4 secs. instead of X hours I noticed a post from maciep: quote: My code is barely making sense to me anymore.
It would be nice to have a third round of golf (Club house discussion ), where the function-/variables-names where discriptive. It would spare us all from trying to understand the brilliant code from the winner. I use a lot of the ideas from the INI-write golf competition, BUT you have to participate to understand the problem/code fully. -Erik
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#97187 - 2002-12-25 05:15 AM
Re: KiXGolf: Burrows-Wheeler Transform
|
Howard Bullock
KiX Supporter
Registered: 2000-09-15
Posts: 5809
Loc: Harrisburg, PA USA
|
25+ hours and still churning.
I cannot fathom how anyone can implement the fast process in less than 260 characters at this time. My fast process is currently around 270 characters. I am sure there are some things that could be improved upon, but the slow method employs less processes and therefore less code. How can the fast process be implemented in 226 characters? I'm still scratching my head how you Shawn got to 220.
Still scratching my head.
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#97189 - 2002-12-26 03:14 AM
Re: KiXGolf: Burrows-Wheeler Transform
|
Howard Bullock
KiX Supporter
Registered: 2000-09-15
Posts: 5809
Loc: Harrisburg, PA USA
|
45 hours 15 minutes and still churning... the simple slow method is indeed sloowww!!!!
|
Top
|
|
|
|
Moderator: Arend_, Allen, Jochen, Radimus, Glenn Barnas, ShaneEP, Ruud van Velsen, Mart
|
0 registered
and 265 anonymous users online.
|
|
|