RE: Possible improvements for the next golf apocalypse
2. Tie-breaking rule I chose to break ties by rewarding the first to post. I suppose other ways are possible (e.g. reward the more efficient one) but they all seem a little artificial. This seems fair to me. First in Best dressed. I don't think that efficiency and Golf should ever be mentioned in the same sentence :) `First wins' is not good IMO, perhaps some additional scoring like for example using non-average(usual) solution is better? this is arguable of cource but it is just an idea... of cource this won't be factor for different strokes count solutions... I would like to see a -- Alistair McGlinchy, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sizing and Performance, Central IT, ext. 5012, ph +44 20 7268-5012 Marks and Spencer, 3 Longwalk Rd, Stockley Park, Uxbridge UB11 1AW, UK -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 10, 2001 1:33 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Possible improvements for the next golf apocalypse Anthony J. Breeds-Taurima wrote: On Sun, 9 Dec 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: While it is still fresh in everyone's minds, I thought I should make some notes on possible improvements for the next apocalypse. 1. Timing We probably all spent more time on this than we can afford. I think 5 days was too long; 2-3 days feels about right. It seems fairest to announce the game start time two weeks (say) before the event, to give people time to prepare. I think that 5 days was good. Or you could have 2 games going Newbies and Guru. The Holes would be the same BUT the duration would be different. ie (Newbies 5 days, Guru 2-3 days). Update the scores and announce the winners at the 2-3 day mark BUT don't release the code. Would that be too cruel a punishment for the gurus. I think a weekend would be fine (i.e. 2 non-working days) 2. Tie-breaking rule I chose to break ties by rewarding the first to post. I suppose other ways are possible (e.g. reward the more efficient one) but they all seem a little artificial. This seems fair to me. First in Best dressed. I don't think that efficiency and Golf should ever be mentioned in the same sentence :) `First wins' is not good IMO, perhaps some additional scoring like for example using non-average(usual) solution is better? this is arguable of cource but it is just an idea... of cource this won't be factor for different strokes count solutions... 3. Number of Holes Though 9/18 is traditional in golf, five seemed sufficient to provide an interesting spread of scores. Any more than five may be unnecessarily cruel. No more than 6. 8 :) 4. Hole Difficulty When I posted the game, I thought the holes were too easy. In retrospect, I think they were about right because they were simple enough to allow novice golfers to have a go, while still providing a challenge for the elite golfer. This level was good. As a newbie, I was certain that I could complete the game thought I wouldn't be too far off the pace. nothing is too easy :) I think any task wich can be solved with regular, readable, non-tricky, few lines (screenpage?) solution will be ok 5. Individual Hole Scores - to post or not to post? don't -- just total. P! Vladi. -- Vladi Belperchinov-Shabanski [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Personal home page at http://www.biscom.net/~cade DataMax Ltd. http://www.datamax.bg Too many hopes and dreams won't see the light... --- Registered Office: Marks Spencer p.l.c Michael House, Baker Street, London, W1U 8EP Registered No. 214436 in England and Wales. Telephone (020) 7935 4422 Facsimile (020) 7487 2670 www.marksandspencer.com Please note that electronic mail may be monitored. This e-mail is confidential. If you received it by mistake, please let us know and then delete it from your system; you should not copy, disclose, or distribute its contents to anyone nor act in reliance on this e-mail, as this is prohibited and may be unlawful. The registered office of Marks and Spencer Financial Services Limited, Marks and Spencer Unit Trust Management Limited, Marks and Spencer Life Assurance Limited and Marks and Spencer Savings and Investments Limited is Kings Meadow, Chester, CH99 9FB.
Re: Possible improvements for the next golf apocalypse
Vladi Belperchinov-Shabanski [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Anthony J. Breeds-Taurima wrote: On Sun, 9 Dec 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: While it is still fresh in everyone's minds, I thought I should make some notes on possible improvements for the next apocalypse. 1. Timing We probably all spent more time on this than we can afford. I think 5 days was too long; 2-3 days feels about right. It seems fairest to announce the game start time two weeks (say) before the event, to give people time to prepare. I think that 5 days was good. Or you could have 2 games going Newbies and Guru. The Holes would be the same BUT the duration would be different. ie (Newbies 5 days, Guru 2-3 days). Update the scores and announce the winners at the 2-3 day mark BUT don't release the code. Would that be too cruel a punishment for the gurus. I think a weekend would be fine (i.e. 2 non-working days) I don't. I don't tend to do much coding on the weekend, but I do quite a bit in the evening and on the train during the week. And I think that drawing a distinction between newbies and gurus is somewhat invidious too, but I can't begin to articulate why. I thought the length of the Christmas competition was maybe a day too long. I was still having ideas to try almost up 'til the deadline and, indeed, I didn't get my entry down to 91 strokes until late on the penultimate day, and I'd certainly not like to see it going much shorter than that. 2. Tie-breaking rule I chose to break ties by rewarding the first to post. I suppose other ways are possible (e.g. reward the more efficient one) but they all seem a little artificial. This seems fair to me. First in Best dressed. I don't think that efficiency and Golf should ever be mentioned in the same sentence :) `First wins' is not good IMO, perhaps some additional scoring like for example using non-average(usual) solution is better? this is arguable of cource but it is just an idea... of cource this won't be factor for different strokes count solutions... The beauty of 'first in breaks the tie' is that it's objective. Which is a good thing. And even if you did come up with a subjective measure based on 'non standardness' or 'elegance' or whatever, the results show that once you get down to minimal length, often the only difference between two solutions is the choice of variable names or where they put the brackets in a regex, so you'd need another tie breaker anyway. It might be nice to see a Judge's Prize for the solution that the judge liked best. It doesn't even have to be the shortest. (It doesn't even have to qualify, given how much -p 11.. tickled the judge this time 'round) 3. Number of Holes Though 9/18 is traditional in golf, five seemed sufficient to provide an interesting spread of scores. Any more than five may be unnecessarily cruel. No more than 6. 8 :) Well, it is a round number, I'll give you that. But I think I prefer six. 4. Hole Difficulty When I posted the game, I thought the holes were too easy. In retrospect, I think they were about right because they were simple enough to allow novice golfers to have a go, while still providing a challenge for the elite golfer. This level was good. As a newbie, I was certain that I could complete the game thought I wouldn't be too far off the pace. nothing is too easy :) I think any task wich can be solved with regular, readable, non-tricky, few lines (screenpage?) solution will be ok Easy is definitely good. It might be nice to see one hole be a 'Take this program and make it shorter' type challenge though. And that could be something with reasonably complex behaviour... -- Piers It is a truth universally acknowledged that a language in possession of a rich syntax must be in need of a rewrite. -- Jane Austen?
Re: Recall: Possible improvements for the next golf apocalypse
On Mon, Dec 10, 2001 at 01:44:47PM -, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: McGlinchy, Alistair would like to recall the message, Possible improvements for the next golf apocalypse. It's mail, Jim, but not as we know it. MBM -- Matthew Byng-Maddick [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://colondot.net/
Re: Possible improvements for the next golf apocalypse
On Sun, Dec 09, 2001 at 12:31:06PM +1100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: However, I suggest that in future games the Arbiter should reveal the leading scores for each hole about 4-8 hours from the end. This should make the final hours quite exciting. I think that 4-8 hours is too short, considering that people may be participating from around the world. It should be at least 16 hours, to give everyone a chance to work with the new information. Ronald
Re: Possible improvements for the next golf apocalypse
Piers Cawley wrote: I think a weekend would be fine (i.e. 2 non-working days) I don't. I don't tend to do much coding on the weekend, but I do quite a bit in the evening and on the train during the week. And I think This is very personal, I don't have much free time during the (working) week and even I prefer not to code in the evening after a nasty long working days... you got that, don't you? Well perhaps most people don't have work to do, I don't know... :/ that drawing a distinction between newbies and gurus is somewhat invidious too, but I can't begin to articulate why. ?) 2. Tie-breaking rule I chose to break ties by rewarding the first to post. I suppose other ways are possible (e.g. reward the more efficient one) but they all seem a little artificial. This seems fair to me. First in Best dressed. I don't think that efficiency and Golf should ever be mentioned in the same sentence :) `First wins' is not good IMO, perhaps some additional scoring like for example using non-average(usual) solution is better? this is arguable of cource but it is just an idea... of cource this won't be factor for different strokes count solutions... The beauty of 'first in breaks the tie' is that it's objective. Which Depends very much of the free time you can use! It is *NOT* objective unless you get all players in a room and you give them timelimit! is a good thing. And even if you did come up with a subjective measure based on 'non standardness' or 'elegance' or whatever, the results show that once you get down to minimal length, often the only difference between two solutions is the choice of variable names or where they put the brackets in a regex, so you'd need another tie breaker anyway. It might be nice to see a Judge's Prize for the solution that the judge liked best. It doesn't even have to be the shortest. (It doesn't even have to qualify, given how much -p 11.. tickled the judge this time 'round) voting between players? long-term leaderboard? finally this is not easy problem... 3. Number of Holes Though 9/18 is traditional in golf, five seemed sufficient to provide an interesting spread of scores. Any more than five may be unnecessarily cruel. No more than 6. 8 :) Well, it is a round number, I'll give you that. But I think I prefer six. 4. 4. Hole Difficulty When I posted the game, I thought the holes were too easy. In retrospect, I think they were about right because they were simple enough to allow novice golfers to have a go, while still providing a challenge for the elite golfer. This level was good. As a newbie, I was certain that I could complete the game thought I wouldn't be too far off the pace. nothing is too easy :) I think any task wich can be solved with regular, readable, non-tricky, few lines (screenpage?) solution will be ok Easy is definitely good. It might be nice to see one hole be a 'Take this program and make it shorter' type challenge though. And that could be something with reasonably complex behaviour... YES! I like it... :) P! Vladi. -- Vladi Belperchinov-Shabanski [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Personal home page at http://www.biscom.net/~cade DataMax Ltd. http://www.datamax.bg Too many hopes and dreams won't see the light... smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: Possible improvements for the next golf apocalypse
En réponse à Piers Cawley [EMAIL PROTECTED]: It might be nice to see a Judge's Prize for the solution that the judge liked best. It doesn't even have to be the shortest. (It doesn't even have to qualify, given how much -p 11.. tickled the judge this time 'round) Yes, the Judge's Prize could even be given to a not that short entry that was very creative or aesthetically (?) pleasant. 4. Hole Difficulty nothing is too easy :) I think any task wich can be solved with regular, readable, non-tricky, few lines (screenpage?) solution will be ok Easy is definitely good. It might be nice to see one hole be a 'Take this program and make it shorter' type challenge though. And that could be something with reasonably complex behaviour... Yes, something like a short compressor/decompressor, or sorting routine. Something with a well-known algorithm : the judge writes (or take a standard) Perl implementation (with a test suite), and the golfers shorten it to death! The first steps are easy: remove comments, newlines, shorten all vars to one char. Then the competition really begins. -- Philippe BRUHAT - BooK When you run from your problem, you make it that much harder for good fortune to catch you, as well. (Moral from Groo The Wanderer #14 (Epic))
RE: Possible improvements for the next golf apocalypse
Hi All,
[Oops apologies for 1/2 message sent before. Memo to self: never Alt-Tab
with your right hand, :-) ]
2. Tie-breaking rule
I chose to break ties by rewarding the first to post.
I suppose other ways are possible (e.g. reward the more
efficient one) but they all seem a little artificial.
This seems fair to me. First in Best dressed. I don't think that
efficiency and Golf should ever be mentioned in the same sentence :)
`First wins' is not good IMO, perhaps some additional scoring like
for example using non-average(usual) solution is better? this is
arguable of cource but it is just an idea... of cource this won't
be factor for different strokes count solutions...
I agree, first wins is a little cruel depending on your time-zone and
spare time.
IMHO a solution to a good hole should be in the 50-70 char region. That way
there's more scope for styling the response. Such styling could include:
- the least number of /a-z/i chars.
- the largest number of times a chosen bonus character is used
- inefficiency of the algorithm
My particular favourite is how sorted the code is
$code=for(0..9)print;
@chars = map {ord($_)} split //, $code;
for ($x=0; $x+1 @chars;$x++) {
$score++ if ($chars[$x]$chars[$x+1]);
}
print $score
I can hear my big sister saying now thats just silly! :-)
Alistair
--
Alistair McGlinchy, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sizing and Performance, Central IT, ext. 5012, ph +44 20 7268-5012
Marks and Spencer, 3 Longwalk Rd, Stockley Park, Uxbridge UB11 1AW, UK
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, December 10, 2001 1:33 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Possible improvements for the next golf apocalypse
Anthony J. Breeds-Taurima wrote:
On Sun, 9 Dec 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
While it is still fresh in everyone's minds, I thought I should
make some notes on possible improvements for the next apocalypse.
1. Timing
We probably all spent more time on this than we can afford.
I think 5 days was too long; 2-3 days feels about right.
It seems fairest to announce the game start time two weeks (say)
before the event, to give people time to prepare.
I think that 5 days was good. Or you could have 2 games going
Newbies and Guru. The Holes would be the same BUT the duration would be
different. ie (Newbies 5 days, Guru 2-3 days). Update the scores and
announce
the winners at the 2-3 day mark BUT don't release the code. Would that
be too
cruel a punishment for the gurus.
I think a weekend would be fine (i.e. 2 non-working days)
2. Tie-breaking rule
I chose to break ties by rewarding the first to post.
I suppose other ways are possible (e.g. reward the more
efficient one) but they all seem a little artificial.
This seems fair to me. First in Best dressed. I don't think that
efficiency and Golf should ever be mentioned in the same sentence :)
`First wins' is not good IMO, perhaps some additional scoring like
for example using non-average(usual) solution is better? this is
arguable of cource but it is just an idea... of cource this won't
be factor for different strokes count solutions...
3. Number of Holes
Though 9/18 is traditional in golf, five seemed sufficient to
provide an interesting spread of scores. Any more than five
may be unnecessarily cruel.
No more than 6.
8 :)
4. Hole Difficulty
When I posted the game, I thought the holes were too easy.
In retrospect, I think they were about right because they were
simple enough to allow novice golfers to have a go, while still
providing a challenge for the elite golfer.
This level was good. As a newbie, I was certain that I could complete
the
game thought I wouldn't be too far off the pace.
nothing is too easy :) I think any task wich can be solved with regular,
readable, non-tricky, few lines (screenpage?) solution will be ok
5. Individual Hole Scores - to post or not to post?
don't -- just total.
P! Vladi.
--
Vladi Belperchinov-Shabanski [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Personal home page at http://www.biscom.net/~cade
DataMax Ltd. http://www.datamax.bg
Too many hopes and dreams won't see the light...
---
Registered Office:
Marks Spencer p.l.c
Michael House, Baker Street,
London, W1U 8EP
Registered No. 214436 in England and Wales.
Telephone (020) 7935 4422
Facsimile (020) 7487 2670
www.marksandspencer.com
Please note that electronic mail may be monitored.
This e-mail is confidential. If you received it by mistake, please let us know and
then delete it from your system; you should not copy, disclose, or distribute its
contents to anyone nor act in reliance on this e-mail, as
Re: Possible improvements for the next golf apocalypse
BooK [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: En réponse à Piers Cawley [EMAIL PROTECTED]: It might be nice to see a Judge's Prize for the solution that the judge liked best. It doesn't even have to be the shortest. (It doesn't even have to qualify, given how much -p 11.. tickled the judge this time 'round) Yes, the Judge's Prize could even be given to a not that short entry that was very creative or aesthetically (?) pleasant. Exactly. And it should be within the gift of the person running the competition, whose word on the subject shall be final. -- Piers It is a truth universally acknowledged that a language in possession of a rich syntax must be in need of a rewrite. -- Jane Austen?
Re: Possible improvements for the next golf apocalypse
On Mon, Dec 10, 2001 at 04:36:26PM +0100, BooK wrote:
En réponse à [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
IMHO a solution to a good hole should be in the 50-70 char region. That way
there's more scope for styling the response. Such styling could
include:
- the least number of /a-z/i chars.
- the largest number of times a chosen bonus character is used
- inefficiency of the algorithm
My particular favourite is how sorted the code is
$code=for(0..9)print;
@chars = map {ord($_)} split //, $code;
for ($x=0; $x+1 @chars;$x++) {
$score++ if ($chars[$x]$chars[$x+1]);
}
print $score
You mean (supposing the code is in $_, and $score is in $s):
$o=\xff;for(split//){$s++if($_$o);$o=$_};print$s
Mmm. This might not work (or compile): I do not have a perl here.
(I tried other things to obfuscate the algorithm, and then I remembered
I was at work. Oops.)
You're using a numeric comparison on strings. :)
$s+=$lt$1while/.(?=(.))/gs;print$s
Ronald
Re: Possible improvements for the next golf apocalypse
BG == Brad Greenlee [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: BG Or why not have a web page to which golfers would post their programs (just BG paste them in to a text field). The test program could run right then and BG update the scores. The arbiter would have admin access to go in and muck BG around (post a new test program, edit entries, etc.) the same system could handle email entries in standard formats. i don't like using attachments and for golf holes don't see any reason plain text and cut and paste won't work fine. putting a delimiter line before and after each submission which also contain hole info is a simple idea. there is a newsgroup (forgot the name) regularly runs cryptic crossword competitions. they have the winner of each one become the puzzle maker and judge of the next one. they don't use any automatic judge/test things since it is a purely verbal battle and no software could help. but i like the idea of the winner being the next judge and/or puzzle maker. uri -- Uri Guttman -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.stemsystems.com -- Stem is an Open Source Network Development Toolkit and Application Suite - - Stem and Perl Development, Systems Architecture, Design and Coding Search or Offer Perl Jobs http://jobs.perl.org
Re: Possible improvements for the next golf apocalypse
On Mon, Dec 10, 2001 at 10:07:15AM -0600, Nicholson, Dale wrote: Santa is nothing more than a perversion added later. Or a shortened name for Saint Nicholas, a Saint of the Catholic church. The choice is yours. -- There seems no plan because it is all plan. -- C.S. Lewis
Re: Possible improvements for the next golf apocalypse
PC == Piers Cawley [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: PC Uri Guttman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: AS == Andrew Savige [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: AS 1. Timing you started it just as i was leaving for LISA. :( i should be around for the next one. just don't do one around the time of the perl whirl in january. PC You're going on that one as well? You bastard! I'm not at all jealous. PC Not at all I tell you. we were on the fence about it but she saw a flyer at randal's booth at LISA and now wants to go. gonna get cheaper cabins this time (you don't spend so much time in them). i want to see arecibo and there is gonna be a private tour of it. they don't get geek groups visiting too often it seems! and jealous you should be. and i am not a bastard! uri -- Uri Guttman -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.stemsystems.com -- Stem is an Open Source Network Development Toolkit and Application Suite - - Stem and Perl Development, Systems Architecture, Design and Coding Search or Offer Perl Jobs http://jobs.perl.org
