Re: python coding contest
Claudio Grondi wrote:
Please send me comments, suggestions and ideas.
Now, after the contest is over I analysed the outcome of it and have
come to the conclusion, that there were two major factors which
contributed to squeezing of code:
(1). usage of available variants for coding of the same thing
(2). sqeezing the size of used numeric and string literals
As (1) leads to less readable cryptic code it makes not much sense from
my point of view to dig deeper in that direction. As already mentioned
in this thread by Tim Peters ( pointing to
http://spoj.sphere.pl/problems/KAMIL/ ) it seems, that Pearl is here the
proper language of choice for such kind of problems anyway.
Trying to improve on (2) belongs in my eyes much more into the area of
problems discussed in comp.compression than to problems belonging into
comp.lang.python .
So what is my point? Ok, I will mention it at the end of this post.
Before that I want to thank the originators of the contest and
especially the participants for providing insight into the techniques
they have used. I have learned from the contest what lambda expression
is good for and how it works where I failed to grasp it from reading
tutorials only.
I have detected, that it would be a nice thing to have in Python a
function able to convert values from binary string to an integer
representation as in my eyes both in case of long integer values are
more or less the same thing/object. The only difference is probably in
the header not in the representation of the actual value in memory - am
I right here? Will it make sense to have a string-integer object which
value can be used in both contexts as a binary string and a long integer
value?
Is there in Python any simple way to do the same as the following two
following functions I have put together today:
def longIntWithBitsOfBinaryString(stringToConvert):
intWithBitsOfBinaryString = 0L
for singleChar in stringToConvert:
intWithBitsOfBinaryString = (intWithBitsOfBinaryString8) +
ord(singleChar)
#:for
return intWithBitsOfBinaryString
#:def longIntWithBitsOfBinaryString(s)
def binaryStringWithBitsOfLongInt(i):
listOfCharsOfStringWithThePackedInt = []
exponent = 1
while i 256**exponent: exponent+=1
for byteNo in range(0,exponent):
noOfBitsToShift = byteNo*8
listOfCharsOfStringWithThePackedInt.append(chr(inoOfBitsToShift0xFF))
#:for
# reverse (in place) in order to get the highest bits of the integer
as leftmost byte
listOfCharsOfStringWithThePackedInt.reverse()
stringWithThePackedInt = ''.join(listOfCharsOfStringWithThePackedInt)
return stringWithThePackedInt
#:def binaryStringWithBitsOfLongInt(i)
print longIntWithBitsOfBinaryString('ABBA') =
%i%longIntWithBitsOfBinaryString('ABBA')
print
binaryStringWithBitsOfLongInt(longIntWithBitsOfBinaryString('ABBA')) =
'%s'%binaryStringWithBitsOfLongInt(longIntWithBitsOfBinaryString('ABBA'))
which gives:
longIntWithBitsOfBinaryString('ABBA') = 1094861377
binaryStringWithBitsOfLongInt(longIntWithBitsOfBinaryString('ABBA')) =
'ABBA'
?
And now my point I have promised to write about:
If squeezing code makes it bad code and compressing literals is more or
less compression technique and not Python programming, it is maybe a
good idea to try to explore what Python distribution provides as data
and modules and rewrite the seven_seg module, but with following
limitations:
1. it is not allowed to use any literals in the provided code
2. it is not allowed to misuse the names of the identifiers as a kind of
literals providing data
3. it is not allowed to use modules or files which doesn't come with the
Python distribution.
I have no slightest idea if it is possible to program a seven_seg
module under such conditions. It could be a sign, that it would be a
very interesting challenge worth to get involved into or a sign I have
no slightest idea about Python and programming.
What do you all think about it?
Claudio
After some coding trials, it turned out to be quite easy (almost
trivial) to overcome the problem of not beeing allowed to use any
literals in the script code, but I suppose, that I am not alone with not
seeing directly how to code it, so it is maybe a good exercise for a
Python beginner (like me) to cope a bit with it.
Knowing this I am curious if it is also comparable easy in other
programming languages, e.g. when using only a C/C++ compiler and linker
executables along with the provided libraries and header files? I
suppose, that each language comes with built-in literals which can be
utilized in own code to get the full range of required literals into
identifiers by using only what the language provides itself.
Am I right or not?
Claudio
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: python coding contest
Steven D'Aprano wrote:
On Sun, 01 Jan 2006 03:34:33 +0100, Claudio Grondi wrote:
Please send me comments, suggestions and ideas.
Now, after the contest is over I analysed the outcome of it and have
come to the conclusion, that there were two major factors which
contributed to squeezing of code:
(1). usage of available variants for coding of the same thing
(2). sqeezing the size of used numeric and string literals
[snip]
Is there in Python any simple way to do the same as the following two
following functions I have put together today:
They are already pretty simple. You can make them even more simple by
using less complicated names and getting rid of the explicit end block
markers. It is sometimes useful to put in explicit end block markers when
you have long blocks, but when the block is just a single line, well,
I don't see the point.
Here is another possibility.
import array
A = array.array('b')
n = 100
while n:
A.append(n255); n = n 8
A.reverse()
A
array('b', [15, 66, 64])
15*256**2 + 66*256 + 64
100
A.tostring()
'\x0fB@'
The reverse transformation is just as easy:
A = array.array('b', \x0fB@) # initialise from a byte string
n = 0L
for b in A:
n = n 8 | b
n
100L
And of course these can be turned into functions.
What I have thought about as a simpler/better solution is a method
allowing to avoid processing the content of the string or long integer
object by looping over its content. I suppose, that knowing enough about
Python internals it must be possible to change only the object type not
beeing forced to process the content i.e. the value itself, what in case
of big size of data to convert with methods like this above wastes CPU
time.
Claudio
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: python coding contest
On Sun, 01 Jan 2006 15:49:58 +0100, Claudio Grondi wrote: What I have thought about as a simpler/better solution is a method allowing to avoid processing the content of the string or long integer object by looping over its content. How can you avoid looping over its content? Whether you do it yourself using for byte in array or similar, or Python does it for you (using array.tostring perhaps), *something* has to walk through the bytes. If you don't like walking the string, write a function to do it once, and then use the function. I suppose, that knowing enough about Python internals it must be possible to change only the object type not beeing forced to process the content i.e. the value itself, what in case of big size of data to convert with methods like this above wastes CPU time. I'm reminded of a time I was going for a drive in the country when I drove past an apple orchid. Standing in the orchid was a farmer with a pig. He lifted the pig into the air, and the pig then bit an apple and slowly chewed it. The farmer then carried him over to another branch, and the pig ate another apple. I was so surprised I stopped my car and wandered over to ask the farmer what he was doing. I'm feeding apples to my pig, he replied. Wouldn't it save time to just pick some apples and feed them to the pig? The farmer looked at me like I was an idiot. What's time to a pig? The moral of the story is, before spending time working on some scheme to save CPU time, you better be absolutely sure that firstly, you are going to save CPU time, secondly, that it is enough CPU time to be worth saving, and thirdly, that you aren't wasting more of your own time to do it. -- Steven. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: python coding contest
Steven D'Aprano wrote: On Sun, 01 Jan 2006 15:49:58 +0100, Claudio Grondi wrote: What I have thought about as a simpler/better solution is a method allowing to avoid processing the content of the string or long integer object by looping over its content. How can you avoid looping over its content? Whether you do it yourself using for byte in array or similar, or Python does it for you (using array.tostring perhaps), *something* has to walk through the bytes. If you don't like walking the string, write a function to do it once, and then use the function. I suppose, that knowing enough about Python internals it must be possible to change only the object type not beeing forced to process the content i.e. the value itself, what in case of big size of data to convert with methods like this above wastes CPU time. I'm reminded of a time I was going for a drive in the country when I drove past an apple orchid. Standing in the orchid was a farmer with a pig. He lifted the pig into the air, and the pig then bit an apple and slowly chewed it. The farmer then carried him over to another branch, and the pig ate another apple. I was so surprised I stopped my car and wandered over to ask the farmer what he was doing. I'm feeding apples to my pig, he replied. Wouldn't it save time to just pick some apples and feed them to the pig? The farmer looked at me like I was an idiot. What's time to a pig? The moral of the story is, before spending time working on some scheme to save CPU time, you better be absolutely sure that firstly, you are going to save CPU time, secondly, that it is enough CPU time to be worth saving, and thirdly, that you aren't wasting more of your own time to do it. It's a funny story :-)) , but in my eyes not appropriate in given context, because my prior goal is to understand some more about Python internals, i.e. what is and if it is at all a differerence between the internal representation of a string and a long integer. I know, I should probably look into the C source of Python, but I suppose it could be too hard for me to find the appropriate piece of code, so I welcome any hints. If I knew the internal representation of string and long integer objects and were able to read/write to memory and point an identifier at a given memory address, a conversion between long integer and string types were probably nothing else as changing some bytes and repointing an identifier (assuming that string and long integer values are in memory the same data if they represent the same value). That it would save CPU time is secondary here, but with increasing costs of energy making the number on my electrical power bill higher each year due to higher power consumption with increasing number of programs I run (it makes a difference of 50 Watt between an algorithm keeping the CPU 100% busy and an algorithm using only 1% of it) it is not necessarily paranoia driving one to consider potential savings of CPU time. In this context the example of the bigdec class comes to my mind, where usage of another algorithm made it possible to cut down power consumption and time of printing a decimal form of the largest known prime number from 7 hours of a 100% busy CPU down to 7 seconds! Claudio -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: python coding contest
Steven D'Aprano wrote: I'm reminded of a time I was going for a drive in the country when I drove past an apple orchid. Standing in the orchid was a farmer with a pig. He lifted the pig into the air, and the pig then bit an apple and slowly chewed it. The farmer then carried him over to another branch, and the pig ate another apple. I was so surprised I stopped my car and wandered over to ask the farmer what he was doing. I'm feeding apples to my pig, he replied. Wouldn't it save time to just pick some apples and feed them to the pig? The farmer looked at me like I was an idiot. What's time to a pig? Has anyone studied if farmers like him are in general healthier ? -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: python coding contest
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Steven D'Aprano wrote: I'm reminded of a time I was going for a drive in the country when I drove past an apple orchid. Standing in the orchid was a farmer with a pig. He lifted the pig into the air, and the pig then bit an apple and slowly chewed it. The farmer then carried him over to another branch, and the pig ate another apple. I was so surprised I stopped my car and wandered over to ask the farmer what he was doing. I'm feeding apples to my pig, he replied. Wouldn't it save time to just pick some apples and feed them to the pig? The farmer looked at me like I was an idiot. What's time to a pig? Has anyone studied if farmers like him are in general healthier ? Yes, they have stronger arms, but some greater incidence of back problems as well. Other than that they're basically just as healthy as the rest of us who feed our pigs the normal way. -Peter -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: python coding contest
Claudio Grondi wrote:
Steven D'Aprano wrote:
On Sun, 01 Jan 2006 15:49:58 +0100, Claudio Grondi wrote:
What I have thought about as a simpler/better solution is a method
allowing to avoid processing the content of the string or long
integer object by looping over its content.
How can you avoid looping over its content? Whether you do it yourself
using for byte in array or similar, or Python does it for you
(using array.tostring perhaps), *something* has to walk through the
bytes.
If you don't like walking the string, write a function to do it once, and
then use the function.
I suppose, that knowing enough about Python internals it must be
possible to change only the object type not beeing forced to process
the content i.e. the value itself, what in case of big size of data
to convert with methods like this above wastes CPU time.
I'm reminded of a time I was going for a drive in the country when I
drove
past an apple orchid. Standing in the orchid was a farmer with a pig. He
lifted the pig into the air, and the pig then bit an apple and slowly
chewed it. The farmer then carried him over to another branch, and the
pig
ate another apple.
I was so surprised I stopped my car and wandered over to ask the farmer
what he was doing.
I'm feeding apples to my pig, he replied.
Wouldn't it save time to just pick some apples and feed them to the
pig?
The farmer looked at me like I was an idiot. What's time to a pig?
The moral of the story is, before spending time working on some scheme to
save CPU time, you better be absolutely sure that firstly, you are going
to save CPU time, secondly, that it is enough CPU time to be worth
saving,
and thirdly, that you aren't wasting more of your own time to do it.
It's a funny story :-))
, but in my eyes not appropriate in given context, because my prior goal
is to understand some more about Python internals, i.e. what is and if
it is at all a differerence between the internal representation of a
string and a long integer.
I know, I should probably look into the C source of Python, but I
suppose it could be too hard for me to find the appropriate piece of
code, so I welcome any hints.
If I knew the internal representation of string and long integer objects
and were able to read/write to memory and point an identifier at a given
memory address, a conversion between long integer and string types were
probably nothing else as changing some bytes and repointing an
identifier (assuming that string and long integer values are in memory
the same data if they represent the same value). That it would save CPU
time is secondary here, but with increasing costs of energy making the
number on my electrical power bill higher each year due to higher power
consumption with increasing number of programs I run (it makes a
difference of 50 Watt between an algorithm keeping the CPU 100% busy and
an algorithm using only 1% of it) it is not necessarily paranoia driving
one to consider potential savings of CPU time.
In this context the example of the bigdec class comes to my mind, where
usage of another algorithm made it possible to cut down power
consumption and time of printing a decimal form of the largest known
prime number from 7 hours of a 100% busy CPU down to 7 seconds!
Claudio
From stringobject.h :
typedef struct {
PyObject_VAR_HEAD
long ob_shash;
int ob_sstate;
char ob_sval[1];
/* Invariants:
* ob_sval contains space for 'ob_size+1' elements.
* ob_sval[ob_size] == 0.
* ob_shash is the hash of the string or -1 if not computed yet.
* ob_sstate != 0 iff the string object is in stringobject.c's
* 'interned' dictionary; in this case the two references
* from 'interned' to this object are *not counted* in ob_refcnt.
*/
} PyStringObject;
From longobject.h :
typedef struct _longobject PyLongObject; /* Revealed in longintrepr.h */
From longintrepr.h :
typedef unsigned short digit;
struct _longobject {
PyObject_VAR_HEAD
digit ob_digit[1];
};
From this I mean to see, that the string data header is longer
containing an additional long and an int compared to long integer data
header. The long integer seem to be an array of unsigned short values
and the string an array of characters. My MSDN help tells me, that:
Type short int (or simply short) is an integral type that is larger
than or equal to the size of type char, and shorter than or equal to the
size of type int. In Microsoft Visual C++ short is 2 bytes long, and
because I am on an Intel processor the sequence of bytes will differ
from what I will get when creating a binary string out of a long integer
due to swapping of byte order. Am I right here?
My conclusion is, that beeing on e.g. Motorola 68000 based processors
the actual data behind the string and the long integer types will be the
same, but beeing on an Intel 386
Re: python coding contest
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED], Simon Hengel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello, After all, I'd really love to set up another contest with different measures and criteria. for future events i will take a close look at other possibilities for doing a ranking. At the moment the 22c3 and the contest is eating up all my time. Pleas appreciate that i may not keep up with all mails. Sorry for that. For whatever it is worth, I enjoyed myself thoroughly thinking about the problem, discussing it and listening to others discuss it. It was FUN! It is built into all requirements for shortest or fastest that the winning solution will be using obscure features and combinations in order to make the absolutely optimal solution. This doesn't really matter unless your goals are to demonstrate the elegance of the programming language. If you want to provide an alternative to solving crossword puzzles or mega-hard Sudoku's for the Christmas holiday, I'd say this is spot on. Jacob Hallén -- -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: python coding contest
Claudio Grondi wrote: ...I analysed the outcome of it and have come to the conclusion, that there were two major factors which contributed to squeezing of code: (1). usage of available variants for coding of the same thing (2). sqeezing the size of used numeric and string literals ...not only squeezing the size of the literals, but the combined size of the compressed data and the code to expand it. In this respect it turned out to be a surprisingly rewarding challenge, and a nice reinforcement of the Pythonic mantra of seeking performance gains by optimizing algorithms. Michael -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: python coding contest
Christian Tismer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hans Nowak wrote: ... for u in(3,14,10)) can be written as: ... for u in 3,14,10) which would shave off a character. Tuples don't always need parentheses... This would work with a list comprehension. Doesn't work with a generator expression (thought of it, too, and the list comprehension eats one char) Right. I asked Guido about that, as he put together the 120-chars submission of Team Google (including some input from me and others), and he says it's to avoid (human) ambiguity, much like the reason the parentheses are mandatory in [(a,b) for ...]. Alex -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: python coding contest
Michael Spencer wrote: Claudio Grondi wrote: ...I analysed the outcome of it and have come to the conclusion, that there were two major factors which contributed to squeezing of code: (1). usage of available variants for coding of the same thing (2). sqeezing the size of used numeric and string literals not only squeezing the size of the literals, but the combined size of the compressed data and the code to expand it. In this respect it turned out to be a surprisingly rewarding challenge, and a nice reinforcement of the Pythonic mantra of seeking performance gains by optimizing algorithms. Michael You are right. I have overseen that aspect which makes the contest a kind of Python scripting language related compression challenge. I haven't done it yet, but I consider it interesting to check out how compression algorithms are doing on the three lines 7 segment LCD mimicking text representations of a decimal number generated by seven_seg() compared to size of input string plus the size of the module. I suppose, as the input string is not of minimal possible size compared to the information it carries, compression schemes should be able to beat the 'compression' by seven_seg(). Interesting in this context for me is also, that if I understand it right, according to Kolmogorov complexity law, it will be never possible to state if the achieved solution is the shortest possible as it will be also not possible for any other provided (shorter) solution. Claudio -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: python coding contest
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED],
Christoph Zwerschke [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Mark Dickinson wrote:
Here's a variant of André's brilliant idea that's
119 characters long, and fully printable:
j=''.join;seven_seg=lambda z:j(j(' _ | |_ _|_|'
[ord('^r|=Zm.:v\r'[int(a)])%u*2:][:3]for a in z)
+\nfor u in(3,7,8))
You have an escaped CR (\r) as the last character in your string.
Which is perfectly printable.
Here is a 118 character fully printable variant without the \r:
j=''.join;seven_seg=lambda x:j(j(' _ |_|_ _|
|'[ord('^rm=3|4:s»'[int(c)])%d*2:][:3]for c in x)+\nfor d in(3,8,7))
Note that there is only one non-ascii character in the code.
Which isn't. So I'm not sure what the point is you're trying to make.
Just
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: python coding contest
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED],
Just [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED],
Christoph Zwerschke [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Mark Dickinson wrote:
Here's a variant of André's brilliant idea that's
119 characters long, and fully printable:
j=''.join;seven_seg=lambda z:j(j(' _ | |_ _|_|'
[ord('^r|=Zm.:v\r'[int(a)])%u*2:][:3]for a in z)
+\nfor u in(3,7,8))
You have an escaped CR (\r) as the last character in your string.
Which is perfectly printable.
Here is a 118 character fully printable variant without the \r:
j=''.join;seven_seg=lambda x:j(j(' _ |_|_ _|
|'[ord('^rm=3|4:s»'[int(c)])%d*2:][:3]for c in x)+\nfor d in(3,8,7))
Note that there is only one non-ascii character in the code.
Which isn't. So I'm not sure what the point is you're trying to make.
Duh, sorry, it's early. 118 is better than 119. Printable or not :)
Still, a 119 bytes version that is fully printable is pretty cool.
Just
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: python coding contest
So, testosterone wins again! We get to boast: Mine's smaller than your's Lets wait for Pythonic to go to bed, then sneak downstairs, go to that tripple-X rated 'shortest solutions' website, and 'whack-off' some solutions. Unghhh, my solution... its coming!!! Well don't forget to clean up before Pythonic wakes up. Happy new year :-) - Pad. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: python coding contest
Just wrote: Duh, sorry, it's early. 118 is better than 119. Printable or not :) Still, a 119 bytes version that is fully printable is pretty cool. No, you're right, I also somehow missed the point. I believed » to be printable (opposed to control char's) but technically speaking, the consensus is that printable restricts to 7-bit-ascii (in Python, string.printable does not even change if you change the locale setting, contrary to string.letters; this is a bit unclear in the Python docs). Mark's point was that his solution was purely 7-bit-ascii printable and as such it was good although it was one byte more. In the next contest, there should be subcategories for solutions that are 7-bit-printable and/or have no imports. -- Christoph -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: python coding contest
André wrote: For the few that might be interested, I will be posting the details of a 117 character long solution to the challenge on my blog http://aroberge.blogspot.com/. Congratulations! I'm very impressed by this elegant solution. It seems to be very hard to improve. No idea if this is possible: One might try to re-order the character string a bit to change moduli, trying to get one more number in (3,14,10) to be one-digit. Haven't tried, yet, and chances are small. congrats again and a happy new year - chris -- Christian Tismer :^) mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] tismerysoft GmbH : Have a break! Take a ride on Python's Johannes-Niemeyer-Weg 9A :*Starship* http://starship.python.net/ 14109 Berlin : PGP key - http://wwwkeys.pgp.net/ work +49 30 802 86 56 mobile +49 173 24 18 776 fax +49 30 80 90 57 05 PGP 0x57F3BF04 9064 F4E1 D754 C2FF 1619 305B C09C 5A3B 57F3 BF04 whom do you want to sponsor today? http://www.stackless.com/ -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: python coding contest
Christian Tismer wrote: André wrote: For the few that might be interested, I will be posting the details of a 117 character long solution to the challenge on my blog http://aroberge.blogspot.com/. ... It seems to be very hard to improve. No idea if this is possible: One might try to re-order the character string a bit to change moduli, trying to get one more number in (3,14,10) to be one-digit. Haven't tried, yet, and chances are small. congrats again and a happy new year - chris With the string of _| I used, starting sub-indices for each 3-character substrings are such that one need modulo 10 (or greater) for at least two of the three indices. I have looked at a few other combinations and, after thinking about it, have convinced myself that it is unfortunately not possible to do. I would love to be proven wrong! Good idea though! Happy New Year to you all! -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: python coding contest
André wrote: Christian Tismer wrote: It seems to be very hard to improve. No idea if this is possible: One might try to re-order the character string a bit to change moduli, trying to get one more number in (3,14,10) to be one-digit. Haven't tried, yet, and chances are small. congrats again and a happy new year - chris With the string of _| I used, starting sub-indices for each 3-character substrings are such that one need modulo 10 (or greater) for at least two of the three indices. I have looked at a few other combinations and, after thinking about it, have convinced myself that it is unfortunately not possible to do. I would love to be proven wrong! Good idea though! I don't know if this suggestion has been made already, but it seems to me that the end of the expression ... for u in(3,14,10)) can be written as: ... for u in 3,14,10) which would shave off a character. Tuples don't always need parentheses... -- Hans Nowak http://zephyrfalcon.org/ -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: python coding contest
Hans Nowak wrote: André wrote: I don't know if this suggestion has been made already, but it seems to me that the end of the expression ... for u in(3,14,10)) can be written as: ... for u in 3,14,10) which would shave off a character. Tuples don't always need parentheses... I tried ... but, in this case, it appears that they do, unfortunately :-( André -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: python coding contest
André wrote: Hans Nowak wrote: André wrote: I don't know if this suggestion has been made already, but it seems to me that the end of the expression ... for u in(3,14,10)) can be written as: ... for u in 3,14,10) which would shave off a character. Tuples don't always need parentheses... I tried ... but, in this case, it appears that they do, unfortunately :-( Ah, you are right. It works for a list comprehension, but not for a genexp. :-( -- Hans Nowak http://zephyrfalcon.org/ -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: python coding contest
Hans Nowak wrote: ... for u in(3,14,10)) can be written as: ... for u in 3,14,10) which would shave off a character. Tuples don't always need parentheses... This would work with a list comprehension. Doesn't work with a generator expression (thought of it, too, and the list comprehension eats one char) cheers - chris -- Christian Tismer :^) mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] tismerysoft GmbH : Have a break! Take a ride on Python's Johannes-Niemeyer-Weg 9A :*Starship* http://starship.python.net/ 14109 Berlin : PGP key - http://wwwkeys.pgp.net/ work +49 30 802 86 56 mobile +49 173 24 18 776 fax +49 30 80 90 57 05 PGP 0x57F3BF04 9064 F4E1 D754 C2FF 1619 305B C09C 5A3B 57F3 BF04 whom do you want to sponsor today? http://www.stackless.com/ -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: python coding contest
Please send me comments, suggestions and ideas.
Now, after the contest is over I analysed the outcome of it and have
come to the conclusion, that there were two major factors which
contributed to squeezing of code:
(1). usage of available variants for coding of the same thing
(2). sqeezing the size of used numeric and string literals
As (1) leads to less readable cryptic code it makes not much sense from
my point of view to dig deeper in that direction. As already mentioned
in this thread by Tim Peters ( pointing to
http://spoj.sphere.pl/problems/KAMIL/ ) it seems, that Pearl is here the
proper language of choice for such kind of problems anyway.
Trying to improve on (2) belongs in my eyes much more into the area of
problems discussed in comp.compression than to problems belonging into
comp.lang.python .
So what is my point? Ok, I will mention it at the end of this post.
Before that I want to thank the originators of the contest and
especially the participants for providing insight into the techniques
they have used. I have learned from the contest what lambda expression
is good for and how it works where I failed to grasp it from reading
tutorials only.
I have detected, that it would be a nice thing to have in Python a
function able to convert values from binary string to an integer
representation as in my eyes both in case of long integer values are
more or less the same thing/object. The only difference is probably in
the header not in the representation of the actual value in memory - am
I right here? Will it make sense to have a string-integer object which
value can be used in both contexts as a binary string and a long integer
value?
Is there in Python any simple way to do the same as the following two
following functions I have put together today:
def longIntWithBitsOfBinaryString(stringToConvert):
intWithBitsOfBinaryString = 0L
for singleChar in stringToConvert:
intWithBitsOfBinaryString = (intWithBitsOfBinaryString8) +
ord(singleChar)
#:for
return intWithBitsOfBinaryString
#:def longIntWithBitsOfBinaryString(s)
def binaryStringWithBitsOfLongInt(i):
listOfCharsOfStringWithThePackedInt = []
exponent = 1
while i 256**exponent: exponent+=1
for byteNo in range(0,exponent):
noOfBitsToShift = byteNo*8
listOfCharsOfStringWithThePackedInt.append(chr(inoOfBitsToShift0xFF))
#:for
# reverse (in place) in order to get the highest bits of the integer
as leftmost byte
listOfCharsOfStringWithThePackedInt.reverse()
stringWithThePackedInt = ''.join(listOfCharsOfStringWithThePackedInt)
return stringWithThePackedInt
#:def binaryStringWithBitsOfLongInt(i)
print longIntWithBitsOfBinaryString('ABBA') =
%i%longIntWithBitsOfBinaryString('ABBA')
print
binaryStringWithBitsOfLongInt(longIntWithBitsOfBinaryString('ABBA')) =
'%s'%binaryStringWithBitsOfLongInt(longIntWithBitsOfBinaryString('ABBA'))
which gives:
longIntWithBitsOfBinaryString('ABBA') = 1094861377
binaryStringWithBitsOfLongInt(longIntWithBitsOfBinaryString('ABBA')) =
'ABBA'
?
And now my point I have promised to write about:
If squeezing code makes it bad code and compressing literals is more or
less compression technique and not Python programming, it is maybe a
good idea to try to explore what Python distribution provides as data
and modules and rewrite the seven_seg module, but with following
limitations:
1. it is not allowed to use any literals in the provided code
2. it is not allowed to misuse the names of the identifiers as a kind of
literals providing data
3. it is not allowed to use modules or files which doesn't come with the
Python distribution.
I have no slightest idea if it is possible to program a seven_seg
module under such conditions. It could be a sign, that it would be a
very interesting challenge worth to get involved into or a sign I have
no slightest idea about Python and programming.
What do you all think about it?
Claudio
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: python coding contest
On Sun, 01 Jan 2006 03:34:33 +0100, Claudio Grondi wrote:
Please send me comments, suggestions and ideas.
Now, after the contest is over I analysed the outcome of it and have
come to the conclusion, that there were two major factors which
contributed to squeezing of code:
(1). usage of available variants for coding of the same thing
(2). sqeezing the size of used numeric and string literals
[snip]
Is there in Python any simple way to do the same as the following two
following functions I have put together today:
They are already pretty simple. You can make them even more simple by
using less complicated names and getting rid of the explicit end block
markers. It is sometimes useful to put in explicit end block markers when
you have long blocks, but when the block is just a single line, well,
I don't see the point.
Here is another possibility.
import array
A = array.array('b')
n = 100
while n:
... A.append(n255); n = n 8
...
A.reverse()
A
array('b', [15, 66, 64])
15*256**2 + 66*256 + 64
100
A.tostring()
'\x0fB@'
The reverse transformation is just as easy:
A = array.array('b', \x0fB@) # initialise from a byte string
n = 0L
for b in A:
... n = n 8 | b
...
n
100L
And of course these can be turned into functions.
--
Steven.
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: python coding contest
Shane Hathaway [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Andrew Durdin wrote: On 12/28/05, Shane Hathaway [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I just found a 125 character solution. It's actually faster and more readable than the 133 character solution (though it's still obscure.) Having spent a good deal of time and effort, and not getting below 144 characters, I am now very eager to see how these shorter versions work, particularly the 6 120-character solutions. I also expect that someone (I'll certainly give it a try) will produce a yet shorter version after the contest closes, based on the knowledge from the winning solutions. Roberto Alsina fully documented his 120 byte solution here: http://www.pycs.net/lateral/weblog/2005/12/29.html#P333 My 120 byte solution is equivalent. Many others probably did the same thing. Python's philosophy of one way to do it seems to be leading us all down the same road. Here's a different way: it generates the output column-wise, then uses zip to assemble line-wise. The additional loop around zip's result probably kills it, for easier redability it's 163 bytes, but a few bytes could easily be spared. Thomas X=' _ _ _ | _| _ |_|_' Y=0x23018F406A3530EC273F008 j=.join seven_seg=lambda n:j(j(c)+\nfor c in zip(*[X[Ym+int(d)*97::8]for d in n for m in(6,3,0)])) -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: python coding contest
Thomas Heller wrote: X=' _ _ _ | _| _ |_|_' Y=0x23018F406A3530EC273F008 j=.join seven_seg=lambda n:j(j(c)+\nfor c in zip(*[X[Ym+int(d)*97::8]for d in n for m in(6,3,0)])) Interesting bit: Although there are more 3-char combinations when you read vertically, they compact better. If A= , B=_ and C=|, this 12 char string contains al possible combinations: BBBABAAACACC which is 2 chars shorter than the best for horizontal combinations: ABAAACBABCBCAC Still, I don't think this vertical idea can go below 123 or 124, but it's good :-) Now I wonder what the 119 solution is! -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: python coding contest
Shane Hathaway wrote:
Andrew Durdin wrote:
On 12/28/05, Shane Hathaway [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I just found a 125 character solution. It's actually faster and more
readable than the 133 character solution (though it's still obscure.)
Having spent a good deal of time and effort, and not getting below 144
characters, I am now very eager to see how these shorter versions
work, particularly the 6 120-character solutions. I also expect that
someone (I'll certainly give it a try) will produce a yet shorter
version after the contest closes, based on the knowledge from the
winning solutions.
Roberto Alsina fully documented his 120 byte solution here:
http://www.pycs.net/lateral/weblog/2005/12/29.html#P333
My 120 byte solution is equivalent. Many others probably did the same
thing. Python's philosophy of one way to do it seems to be leading us
all down the same road.
However, it still feels like there's room for improvement. I have a 123
byte solution based on a fairly repetitive 21 character string; if I
could compress the representation of the string, it could win.
Apparently there was as someone put out a 119 byte solution. I can't get
to Roberto's code at present (perhaps he's suffering a bandwidth
crisis?), but it seems that my 120 character solution is different. It
sounds like he encoded his as a row at a time and did two loops one for
each character and one for each row. I encoded the data per character
and did three loops one per column, one per character and one per row.
I'm sure that's not clear, so here's the code:
g=''.join;seven_seg=lambda i:g(
g(' _|x|'[ord(~$]m'k{d\x7fo[int(n)])sj]
for n in i for j in(2,1,4))+'\n'for s in(6,0,3))
I've replaced the unprintable characters and added some preemptive
linebreaks so that hopefully this won't get too munged. It's all clear
now, right? Two hints: 6,0,3-row, 2,1,4-column and the 6 and 1 have to
be where they are to exploit the property that the top row only ever has
a center character in it. That way things can be encoded in 7-bits and
fit in a character string that Python likes. The order of the other loop
indices is mostly accidental but not all permutations may work.
I'm off to try to figure out how to do it the other way now, before the
code gets revealed.
-tim
-tim
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: python coding contest
Tim Hochberg wrote:
Shane Hathaway wrote:
Andrew Durdin wrote:
On 12/28/05, Shane Hathaway [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I just found a 125 character solution. It's actually faster and more
readable than the 133 character solution (though it's still obscure.)
Having spent a good deal of time and effort, and not getting below 144
characters, I am now very eager to see how these shorter versions
work, particularly the 6 120-character solutions. I also expect that
someone (I'll certainly give it a try) will produce a yet shorter
version after the contest closes, based on the knowledge from the
winning solutions.
Roberto Alsina fully documented his 120 byte solution here:
http://www.pycs.net/lateral/weblog/2005/12/29.html#P333
My 120 byte solution is equivalent. Many others probably did the same
thing. Python's philosophy of one way to do it seems to be leading us
all down the same road.
However, it still feels like there's room for improvement. I have a 123
byte solution based on a fairly repetitive 21 character string; if I
could compress the representation of the string, it could win.
Apparently there was as someone put out a 119 byte solution. I can't get
to Roberto's code at present (perhaps he's suffering a bandwidth
crisis?), but it seems that my 120 character solution is different. It
sounds like he encoded his as a row at a time and did two loops one for
each character and one for each row. I encoded the data per character
and did three loops one per column, one per character and one per row.
I'm sure that's not clear, so here's the code:
g=''.join;seven_seg=lambda i:g(
g(' _|x|'[ord(~$]m'k{d\x7fo[int(n)])sj]
for n in i for j in(2,1,4))+'\n'for s in(6,0,3))
I've replaced the unprintable characters and added some preemptive
linebreaks so that hopefully this won't get too munged. It's all clear
now, right? Two hints: 6,0,3-row, 2,1,4-column and the 6 and 1 have to
be where they are to exploit the property that the top row only ever has
a center character in it. That way things can be encoded in 7-bits and
fit in a character string that Python likes. The order of the other loop
indices is mostly accidental but not all permutations may work.
I'm off to try to figure out how to do it the other way now, before the
code gets revealed.
-tim
-tim
Mine was practically identical, but with another permutation of the loop
variables:
seven_seg=lambda n,s=.join:s(
s( _| |[ord('w\x12][:koR\x7f{'[int(i)])rj]
for i in n for j in(4,1,2))+\nfor r in(6,3,0))
More evidence that 'there is one obvious way to do it' ;-)
Still curious about 119, though
Michael
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: python coding contest
Tim Hochberg wrote:
g=''.join;seven_seg=lambda i:g(
g(' _|x|'[ord(~$]m'k{d\x7fo[int(n)])sj]
for n in i for j in(2,1,4))+'\n'for s in(6,0,3))
I've replaced the unprintable characters and added some preemptive
linebreaks so that hopefully this won't get too munged. It's all clear
now, right? Two hints: 6,0,3-row, 2,1,4-column and the 6 and 1 have to
be where they are to exploit the property that the top row only ever has
a center character in it. That way things can be encoded in 7-bits and
fit in a character string that Python likes. The order of the other loop
indices is mostly accidental but not all permutations may work.
I worked on a similar solution, but didn't have the idea of iterating
over a series of masks as you did with the 'j' variable. Good work.
I'm off to try to figure out how to do it the other way now, before the
code gets revealed.
We should have more contests like this. While the skills I applied for
the contest don't have much practical value, the mental exercise was great.
Shane
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: python coding contest
my two solutions (well I wasn't so clever to encode everything in
strings instead of numbers, but at least it won't give warnings about
non ascii characters):
128:
j,seven_seg=''.join,lambda s:j(j(' |_ |'[i3*int(c)b]for c in s for b
in(4,2,1))+'\n'for i in(306775170,1060861645,524130191))
122:
seven_seg=lambda s,j=''.join:j(j(' _ _|_| |_
|'[i3*int(c)14:][:3]for c in s)+'\n'for i
in(8208,934111592,664455910))
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: python coding contest
Szabolcs Nagy wrote:
my two solutions (well I wasn't so clever to encode everything in
strings instead of numbers, but at least it won't give warnings about
non ascii characters):
128:
j,seven_seg=''.join,lambda s:j(j(' |_ |'[i3*int(c)b]for c in s for b
in(4,2,1))+'\n'for i in(306775170,1060861645,524130191))
122:
seven_seg=lambda s,j=''.join:j(j(' _ _|_| |_
|'[i3*int(c)14:][:3]for c in s)+'\n'for i
in(8208,934111592,664455910))
FWIW, here's my 121 character solution that's fully printable. (Line
breaks added.)
seven_seg=lambda s,j=''.join:j(j(
' _ _| |_ |_|'[ord('^-TR5bfmvr'[int(c)])/b%8*2:][:3]for c in s)+'\n'
for b in(64,8,1))
This solution uses the 7 lower bits of every encoded byte, rather than
the 7 upper bits that the 8 bit solutions use. 8 bits make it possible
to avoid multiplying by 2, but I wanted this version to use pure ASCII,
so I had to multiply by 2. The choice to divide rather than shift is
important because it allowed me to eliminate parentheses.
It's interesting that there seems to be no room for special cases. For
example, the top row has only two states and those states are not used
by the other rows. Therefore, the top row could be computed in a much
simpler way than the other two rows, and the other two rows could be
simplified by having only 5 possible states rather than 7. However, all
my attempts to exploit this property produced larger code.
Shane
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: python coding contest
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thomas Heller wrote: X=' _ _ _ | _| _ |_|_' Y=0x23018F406A3530EC273F008 j=.join seven_seg=lambda n:j(j(c)+\nfor c in zip(*[X[Ym+int(d)*97::8]for d in n for m in(6,3,0)])) Interesting bit: Although there are more 3-char combinations when you read vertically, they compact better. If A= , B=_ and C=|, this 12 char string contains al possible combinations: BBBABAAACACC which is 2 chars shorter than the best for horizontal combinations: ABAAACBABCBCAC Still, I don't think this vertical idea can go below 123 or 124, but it's good :-) Now I wonder what the 119 solution is! I suppose the known 120 solution twisted to work with a one byte shorter string as you already found it out providing one example of it above, right? :-) Claudio -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: python coding contest
For the few that might be interested, I will be posting the details of a 117 character long solution to the challenge on my blog http://aroberge.blogspot.com/. Enjoy! André -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: python coding contest
André wrote: For the few that might be interested, I will be posting the details of a 117 character long solution to the challenge on my blog http://aroberge.blogspot.com/. Enjoy! You took advantage of prime numbers, enabling you to extract encoded information using a single modulus operation rather than shift and mask. Brilliant strategy. Congratulations. Shane -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: python coding contest
Shane Hathaway wrote: André wrote: For the few that might be interested, I will be posting the details of a 117 character long solution to the challenge on my blog http://aroberge.blogspot.com/. Enjoy! You took advantage of prime numbers, enabling you to extract encoded information using a single modulus operation rather than shift and mask. Brilliant strategy. Congratulations. Indeed. Very impressive. And thanks for posting, it was driving me nuts. Now I wonder if this could be adapted to the other, three loop strategy? It's not clear, but there are three characters that are superfulous in the current incarnation of that. Hmmm.. -tim -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: python coding contest
André wrote: For the few that might be interested, I will be posting the details of a 117 character long solution to the challenge on my blog http://aroberge.blogspot.com/. Enjoy! André It doesn't work for me as described on that page. The output is scrumbled. It seems, that the 12 bytes long string ' _ |_|_ _| |' is the reason, as the index [11] to it gives '|' not the expected '| |'. There are a total of 24 following 14 bytes strings possible for use in coding of indexes to all necessary character triples: ' | |_ _ _|_|' ' | |_|_ _ _|' ' |_ _ _| |_|' ' |_ _ _|_| |' ' |_| |_ _ _|' ' |_|_ _ _| |' ' _ | |_ _|_|' ' _ | |_|_ _|' ' _ |_ _| |_|' ' _ |_ _|_| |' ' _ |_| |_ _|' ' _ |_|_ _| |' ' _ _| |_ |_|' ' _ _| |_|_ |' ' _ _|_ | |_|' ' _ _|_ |_| |' ' _ _|_| |_ |' ' _ _|_|_ | |' ' _| |_ _ |_|' ' _| |_|_ _ |' ' _|_ _ | |_|' ' _|_ _ |_| |' ' _|_| |_ _ |' ' _|_|_ _ | |' so I tried all which made sense in the context of '0' conversion and found out, that it should be the ' _ |_|_ _| |' not the at http://aroberge.blogspot.com/ ' _ |_|_ _| |' given one to make the described algorithm work as expected. Anyway, the code with the two bytes longer string is 117 bytes long, so the announcement of a 117 bytes long code keeps what it promises. Excellent work! What I wonder about is, how the author arrived at that solution? Trying all of the 24 available 14 byte strings to see which one produces the coding table which can be used as it was used? Trial-and-error over using division, modulo, shifting, masking? What was the path of thought to arrive at that? Knowing the solution seems to be of little value if not knowing how to arrive at it when a similar problem comes up in the future. Claudio P.S. By the way: on Windows XP with UltraEdit there was no problem to input the special characters. There is an ASCII table and a HEX editor mode available for it. Any hints which free editor makes it possible, too? -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: python coding contest
Claudio Grondi wrote: so I tried all which made sense in the context of '0' conversion and found out, that it should be the ' _ |_|_ _| |' not the at http://aroberge.blogspot.com/ ' _ |_|_ _| |' The HTML source has the three spaces. If the code had been surrounded by a pre tag, it would have rendered correctly. Shane -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: python coding contest
Shane Hathaway wrote: Claudio Grondi wrote: so I tried all which made sense in the context of '0' conversion and found out, that it should be the ' _ |_|_ _| |' not the at http://aroberge.blogspot.com/ ' _ |_|_ _| |' The HTML source has the three spaces. If the code had been surrounded by a pre tag, it would have rendered correctly. Shane Thanks, I hadn't noticed that. It should be fixed now. André -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: python coding contest
Claudio Grondi wrote: P.S. By the way: on Windows XP with UltraEdit there was no problem to input the special characters. There is an ASCII table and a HEX editor mode available for it. Any hints which free editor makes it possible, too? I simply used Pythonwin. (print chr(3), then cut and paste the result in my python file). André -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: python coding contest
Mark Dickinson wrote:
Here's a variant of André's brilliant idea that's
119 characters long, and fully printable:
j=''.join;seven_seg=lambda z:j(j(' _ | |_ _|_|'
[ord('^r|=Zm.:v\r'[int(a)])%u*2:][:3]for a in z)
+\nfor u in(3,7,8))
You have an escaped CR (\r) as the last character in your string.
Here is a 118 character fully printable variant without the \r:
j=''.join;seven_seg=lambda x:j(j(' _ |_|_ _|
|'[ord('^rm=3|4:s»'[int(c)])%d*2:][:3]for c in x)+\nfor d in(3,8,7))
Note that there is only one non-ascii character in the code.
However, André's final solution is one character shorter (117).
-- Christoph
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: python coding contest
A funny thing happened to me. The http://www.pycontest.net/ site was down for some minutes because : A problem occurred in a Python script. it seems, that 'some clever cheat' has crashed it. That was me, i broke things while tweaking some stuff. Sorry for the inconveniences, Simon Hengel -- python coding contest - http://www.pycontest.net/ -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: python coding contest
I cannot not reach the contest site at since all this morning. :-( -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: python coding contest
I cannot reach the contest site at since all this morning. :-( -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: python coding contest
Simon Hengel wrote: Hello, we are hosting a python coding contest an we even managed to provide a price for the winner... http://pycontest.net/ The contest is coincidentally held during the 22c3 and we will be present there. https://events.ccc.de/congress/2005/wiki/Python_coding_contest Please send me comments, suggestions and ideas. Have fun, It seems, that the site had some trouble to stay online and especially to provide the ranking today. I am a bit dissapointed, that my idea of not duplicating, but utilizing the efforts others put into solving the job (titled by the submitter ID 'TheParasite') which resulted in a submission of a 15 Bytes large full functional module was evaluated as having a 'syntax error' problem and was placed in the ranking at the position according to the size of the 331 byte large .zip archive it was put into along with some necessary installation instructions. By the way: trying to submit along with the module complete installation instructions and comments failed because there is a 345 bytes limit for size of allowed uploads. Claudio -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: python coding contest
It seems, that the site had some trouble to stay online and especially to provide the ranking today. There was a problem with our server, sorry for that. Have fun, Simon Hengel -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: python coding contest
Duncan Booth wrote: Christian Tismer wrote: And then help me to setup a different contest about content -- chris Count me in. Great! Let's find a problem small enough to solve in reasonably time and large enough to exploit Python qualities. sincerely -- chris (below 130) -- Christian Tismer :^) mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] tismerysoft GmbH : Have a break! Take a ride on Python's Johannes-Niemeyer-Weg 9A :*Starship* http://starship.python.net/ 14109 Berlin : PGP key - http://wwwkeys.pgp.net/ work +49 30 802 86 56 mobile +49 173 24 18 776 fax +49 30 80 90 57 05 PGP 0x57F3BF04 9064 F4E1 D754 C2FF 1619 305B C09C 5A3B 57F3 BF04 whom do you want to sponsor today? http://www.stackless.com/ -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: python coding contest
On 12/28/05, Shane Hathaway [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I just found a 125 character solution. It's actually faster and more readable than the 133 character solution (though it's still obscure.) Having spent a good deal of time and effort, and not getting below 144 characters, I am now very eager to see how these shorter versions work, particularly the 6 120-character solutions. I also expect that someone (I'll certainly give it a try) will produce a yet shorter version after the contest closes, based on the knowledge from the winning solutions. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: python coding contest
Andrew Durdin wrote: On 12/28/05, Shane Hathaway [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I just found a 125 character solution. It's actually faster and more readable than the 133 character solution (though it's still obscure.) Having spent a good deal of time and effort, and not getting below 144 characters, I am now very eager to see how these shorter versions work, particularly the 6 120-character solutions. I also expect that someone (I'll certainly give it a try) will produce a yet shorter version after the contest closes, based on the knowledge from the winning solutions. Roberto Alsina fully documented his 120 byte solution here: http://www.pycs.net/lateral/weblog/2005/12/29.html#P333 My 120 byte solution is equivalent. Many others probably did the same thing. Python's philosophy of one way to do it seems to be leading us all down the same road. However, it still feels like there's room for improvement. I have a 123 byte solution based on a fairly repetitive 21 character string; if I could compress the representation of the string, it could win. Shane -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: python coding contest
On 27 Dec 2005 09:24:44 GMT, Duncan Booth [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Scott David Daniels wrote: I definitively need a new algorythm. g And I am sadly stuck at 169. Not even spitting distance from 149 (which sounds like a non-cheat version). Throw it away and start again with a fresh (clean) solution. That's what I did when I'd reached the limit of nested maps and lambdas at 150 characters. I'm now on 134 characters and the solution is very nearly legible. (Frustratingly, I'm away for the next few days, so I may not get a chance to submit my solution). It would be a nice idea to come up with a scoring system which better reflects Python's ideals. For example, use the parser in Python to count up various syntactic elements, score 0 for comments, indents, dedents, newlines, docstrings, 1 for each name or operation used and higher scores for things like lambda or overly complex expressions. [23:28] C:\pywk\clp\seven\pycontest_01py24 test.py . -- Ran 1 test in 0.391s OK [23:28] C:\pywk\clp\seven\pycontest_01wc -lc seven_seg.py 2136 seven_seg.py 2 lines, 136 chars including unix-style lineseps (is that cheating on windows?) No imports. Guess I'll have to try another tack ;-/ Regards, Bengt Richter -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: python coding contest
Tim Hochberg wrote: py pan wrote: When you guys say 127~150 characters, did you guys mean usinging test_vectors.py in some way? Or there's no import at all? No import at all. The shortest solution reported so far is 131 characters. Getting down to 127 is just a guess as to where the lower bound is likely to be. Note that in principle it's possible to encode the data for how to display a digit in one byte. Thus it's at least theoretically possible to condense all of the information about the string into a string that's 10 bytes long. In practice it turns out to be hard to do that, since a 10 byte string will generally have a representation that is longer than 10 bytes because of the way the escape sequences get printed out. As a result various people seem to be encoding the data in long integers of one sort or another. The data is then extracted using some recipe involving shifts and s. -tim Condensing is good but only as far as code for decompressing is small... By the way, after I noticed that I program for 2.3, I tried with 2.4 and get out extra characters thanks for generator expression and .join() integration. So now I am at 147. Probably a lot of reserve as I have 3 fors... One for just for the purpose of getting a name: ...x for x in [scalar] Probably its time rething solution from scratch... Roman Susi -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: python coding contest
Christian Tismer wrote: And then help me to setup a different contest about content -- chris Count me in. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: python coding contest
I just found a 125 character solution. It's actually faster and more readable than the 133 character solution (though it's still obscure.) It depends on Python 2.4. If Python 2.3 compatibility is required for the contest, I have to add 4 characters. Shane [EMAIL PROTECTED] pycontest_01]$ wc -c seven_seg.py 125 seven_seg.py [EMAIL PROTECTED] pycontest_01]$ python test.py . -- Ran 1 test in 0.084s OK -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: python coding contest
Shane Hathaway wrote: I just found a 125 character solution. It's actually faster and more readable than the 133 character solution (though it's still obscure.) It depends on Python 2.4. If Python 2.3 compatibility is required for the contest, I have to add 4 characters. I asked, 2.4 is OK. Drat: I had a 128 char solution I was keeping in reserve. Now it's back to the drawing board -tim -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: python coding contest
Jean-Paul Calderone wrote:
On Tue, 27 Dec 2005 14:02:57 -0700, Tim Hochberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Shane Hathaway wrote:
Paul McGuire wrote:
Also, here's another cheat version. (No, 7seg.com does not exist.)
import urllib2
def seven_seg(x):return urllib2.urlopen('http://7seg.com/'+x).read()
And another one from me as well.
class a:
def __eq__(s,o):return 1
seven_seg=lambda i:a()
This is shorter as __eq__=lambda s,o:1.
Or even
class seven_seg(str):__eq__=lambda*a:1
39 characters; passes the test suite. I'm sure it would be
disqualified for cheating, though. :-)
But I can't find the first post in this thread... What are you
guys talking about?
http://www.pycontest.net
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: python coding contest
Marius Gedminas wrote:
Jean-Paul Calderone wrote:
On Tue, 27 Dec 2005 14:02:57 -0700, Tim Hochberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Shane Hathaway wrote:
Paul McGuire wrote:
Also, here's another cheat version. (No, 7seg.com does not exist.)
import urllib2
def seven_seg(x):return urllib2.urlopen('http://7seg.com/'+x).read()
And another one from me as well.
class a:
def __eq__(s,o):return 1
seven_seg=lambda i:a()
This is shorter as __eq__=lambda s,o:1.
Or even
class seven_seg(str):__eq__=lambda*a:1
39 characters; passes the test suite. I'm sure it would be
disqualified for cheating, though. :-)
Tricky. That leads to this 30 character gem:
class seven_seg(str):__eq__=id
-tim
But I can't find the first post in this thread... What are you
guys talking about?
http://www.pycontest.net
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: python coding contest
[Bengt Richter] ... [23:28] C:\pywk\clp\seven\pycontest_01wc -lc seven_seg.py 2136 seven_seg.py 2 lines, 136 chars including unix-style lineseps (is that cheating on windows?) Na. Most native Windows apps (including native Windows Python) don't care whether \n or \r\n in used as the line terminator in text files. This is because the platform C library changes \r\n to \n on input of a text-mode file, and leaves \n alone: the difference is literally invisible to most apps. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: python coding contest
Simon Hengel wrote: Hello, we are hosting a python coding contest an we even managed to provide a price for the winner... http://pycontest.net/ The contest is coincidentally held during the 22c3 and we will be present there. https://events.ccc.de/congress/2005/wiki/Python_coding_contest Please send me comments, suggestions and ideas. Have fun, A funny thing happened to me. The http://www.pycontest.net/ site was down for some minutes because : A problem occurred in a Python script. it seems, that 'some clever cheat' has crashed it. Claudio -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: python coding contest
the dream of winning the contest seems to be over. Sorry for that, I'm considering doing a ranking on the nicest cheats too. Have fun, Simon Hengel -- python coding contest - http://www.pycontest.net/ -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: python coding contest
Hello, After all, I'd really love to set up another contest with different measures and criteria. for future events i will take a close look at other possibilities for doing a ranking. At the moment the 22c3 and the contest is eating up all my time. Pleas appreciate that i may not keep up with all mails. Sorry for that. Cheers, -- python coding contest - http://www.pycontest.net/ -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: python coding contest
Scott David Daniels [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Remi Villatel wrote: Tim Hochberg wrote: I am currently at 39 bytes following the requirements and the principle given above (my module passes the test). Anyone able to beat that? Wow! It'll be interesting to see how to do that. The obvious way gives 53 bytes. Hmmm, I'll have to see what can be done... 39 bytes... 53 bytes... It gives me the impression to follow a jet plane with a bike with my 179 bytes! There isn't a single superfluous byte. My code is so compressed that the syntactic colorizer can't cope any more. I definitively need a new algorythm. g And I am sadly stuck at 169. Not even spitting distance from 149 (which sounds like a non-cheat version). --Scott David Daniels [EMAIL PROTECTED] Well *I'm* certainly looking forward to learning some new tricks! My (non-cheat) version is a comparatively-portly 245, and no alternatives are popping into my head at the moment! -- Paul -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: python coding contest
Paul McGuire [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] snip Well *I'm* certainly looking forward to learning some new tricks! My (non-cheat) version is a comparatively-portly 245, and no alternatives are popping into my head at the moment! -- Paul down to 2 lines, 229 characters -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: python coding contest
Scott David Daniels wrote: I definitively need a new algorythm. g And I am sadly stuck at 169. Not even spitting distance from 149 (which sounds like a non-cheat version). Throw it away and start again with a fresh (clean) solution. That's what I did when I'd reached the limit of nested maps and lambdas at 150 characters. I'm now on 134 characters and the solution is very nearly legible. (Frustratingly, I'm away for the next few days, so I may not get a chance to submit my solution). It would be a nice idea to come up with a scoring system which better reflects Python's ideals. For example, use the parser in Python to count up various syntactic elements, score 0 for comments, indents, dedents, newlines, docstrings, 1 for each name or operation used and higher scores for things like lambda or overly complex expressions. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: python coding contest
Paul McGuire wrote:
Paul McGuire [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
snip
Well *I'm* certainly looking forward to learning some new tricks! My
(non-cheat) version is a comparatively-portly 245, and no alternatives are
popping into my head at the moment!
-- Paul
down to 2 lines, 229 characters
I'm down to 133 characters (counted according to 'wc -c') on a single
line. It contains about 11 whitespace characters (depending on what you
consider whitespace.) It's way too tricky for my taste, but it's fun to
play anyway. Has anyone done better so far? Here's a hint on my
strategy: the code contains three large integers. :-)
Also, here's another cheat version. (No, 7seg.com does not exist.)
import urllib2
def seven_seg(x):return urllib2.urlopen('http://7seg.com/'+x).read()
Shane
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: python coding contest
Shane Hathaway [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] I'm down to 133 characters (counted according to 'wc -c') on a single line. It contains about 11 whitespace characters (depending on what you consider whitespace.) It's way too tricky for my taste, but it's fun to play anyway. Has anyone done better so far? Here's a hint on my strategy: the code contains three large integers. :-) With 1 large integer, I am down to 200 characters on 1 multiline line. I can guess why you have 3 integers vs. 1, but I don't see how that saves you any characters of code. -- Paul -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: python coding contest
I now have a version which passes the test suite in 32 bytes evil grin -T. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: python coding contest
Ciao, Shane Hathaway! Che stavi dicendo? I'm down to 133 characters (counted according to 'wc -c') on a single line. It contains about 11 whitespace characters (depending on what you consider whitespace.) $ wc -c seven_seg.py 137 seven_seg.py $ sed 's/ //g' seven_seg.py|wc -c 120 (yeah, too much spaces, I think) It's way too tricky for my taste, but it's fun to play anyway. Has anyone done better so far? Here's a hint on my strategy: the code contains three large integers. :-) why using 3 longint is better than one?! Trying to split my BIG int in 3 just make my code longer... ok, ok... I will wait the end of the contest... :) -- Firma in costruzione -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: python coding contest
Paul McGuire wrote: Shane Hathaway [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] I'm down to 133 characters (counted according to 'wc -c') on a single line. It contains about 11 whitespace characters (depending on what you consider whitespace.) It's way too tricky for my taste, but it's fun to play anyway. Has anyone done better so far? Here's a hint on my strategy: the code contains three large integers. :-) With 1 large integer, I am down to 200 characters on 1 multiline line. I can guess why you have 3 integers vs. 1, but I don't see how that saves you any characters of code. This is interesting. I have a six line solution that is 133 characters long. I use no long integers, which is what's interesting; two distinct solutions with the same length. I played with long integers for a bit, and I can see how one could use a single long integer, but no idea how one would use three. -tim -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: python coding contest
Tim Hochberg wrote: Paul McGuire wrote: Shane Hathaway [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] I'm down to 133 characters (counted according to 'wc -c') on a single line. It contains about 11 whitespace characters (depending on what you consider whitespace.) It's way too tricky for my taste, but it's fun to play anyway. Has anyone done better so far? Here's a hint on my strategy: the code contains three large integers. :-) With 1 large integer, I am down to 200 characters on 1 multiline line. I can guess why you have 3 integers vs. 1, but I don't see how that saves you any characters of code. This is interesting. I have a six line solution that is 133 characters long. 133 characters according to 'wc -c'? If so, that will surely win style points over my one-line monster. But I bet someone's going to do better (without cheating.) Shane -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: python coding contest
Tim Hochberg wrote: This is interesting. I have a six line solution that is 133 characters long. I use no long integers, which is what's interesting; two distinct solutions with the same length. I played with long integers for a bit, and I can see how one could use a single long integer, but no idea how one would use three. I have a 131 character solution with 3 large numbers. Once you've figured out how to use 3 numbers there's actually quite a variety of options to use different numbers in subtly different ways: I was stuck on 133 characters for quite a while, but I think the trick is to think of ways to make the numbers smaller. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: python coding contest
Shane Hathaway wrote: Tim Hochberg wrote: Paul McGuire wrote: Shane Hathaway [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] I'm down to 133 characters (counted according to 'wc -c') on a single line. It contains about 11 whitespace characters (depending on what you consider whitespace.) It's way too tricky for my taste, but it's fun to play anyway. Has anyone done better so far? Here's a hint on my strategy: the code contains three large integers. :-) With 1 large integer, I am down to 200 characters on 1 multiline line. I can guess why you have 3 integers vs. 1, but I don't see how that saves you any characters of code. This is interesting. I have a six line solution that is 133 characters long. 133 characters according to 'wc -c'? Indeed: C:\...\pycontest_01wc -c seven_seg_8.py 133 seven_seg_8.py I you strip leading and trailing whitespace, it's 122 characters. For comparison, seven_seg_1.py is 816 characters long:) If so, that will surely win style points over my one-line monster. It's pretty readable, at least with the right tabs setting in one's editor, except for the guts of the thing, which consists of 21 characters of marvelously inscrutable goop. But I bet someone's going to do better (without cheating.) I expect so. However, most people, at least those that are talking, seem to be stalling out in the low 130s, so I predict the final winner will be 127-130 characters long. -tim -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: python coding contest
So, is an ugly short one a candidate? i managed in 199 bytes :) i'll send it in anyway ciao http://gumuz.looze.net/ -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: python coding contest
When you guys say 127~150 characters, did you guys mean usinging test_vectors.py in some way? Or there's no import at all? -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: python coding contest
On 12/25/05, Simon Hengel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 I'm envisioning lots of convoluted one-liners which are more suitable to a different P-language... :-) I feel that python is more beautiful and readable, even if you write short programs. .. yes but there's a difference, some users of that other P-language seem to actually take some sort of ritualistic pride in their ability to condense code down to one convoluted line. The language is also a little more apt at it since it has a great deal of shorthand built in to the core language. Shorter is not necessarily better and I do support his opinion that reinforcing short as good isn't really what most programmers (who care about readability and quality) want to support. How about best compromize between shortness and readibility plus elegance of design? I would love to choose those criteria for future events. But I'm not aware of any algorithm that is capable of creating a ranking upon them. Maybe we can come up with a solution. Any ideas? I think code efficiency would be a better choice. A longer program is only worse if its wasting cycles on badly implemented algorithms. Code size is a really bad gauge, If your actually comparing size as in byte-to-byte comparison, you'll be getting a ton of implementations with absolutely no documentation and plenty of one letter variable names. I haven't checked the web site either, are you allowing third party modules to be used? If so, that causes even more problems in the comparison. How are you going to compare those who use a module vs implement it themselves in pure python? -- James Tanis [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://pycoder.org -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: python coding contest
py pan wrote: When you guys say 127~150 characters, did you guys mean usinging test_vectors.py in some way? Or there's no import at all? No import at all. The shortest solution reported so far is 131 characters. Getting down to 127 is just a guess as to where the lower bound is likely to be. Note that in principle it's possible to encode the data for how to display a digit in one byte. Thus it's at least theoretically possible to condense all of the information about the string into a string that's 10 bytes long. In practice it turns out to be hard to do that, since a 10 byte string will generally have a representation that is longer than 10 bytes because of the way the escape sequences get printed out. As a result various people seem to be encoding the data in long integers of one sort or another. The data is then extracted using some recipe involving shifts and s. -tim -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: python coding contest
Shane Hathaway wrote:
Paul McGuire wrote:
Paul McGuire [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
snip
Well *I'm* certainly looking forward to learning some new tricks! My
(non-cheat) version is a comparatively-portly 245, and no alternatives are
popping into my head at the moment!
-- Paul
down to 2 lines, 229 characters
I'm down to 133 characters (counted according to 'wc -c') on a single
line. It contains about 11 whitespace characters (depending on what you
consider whitespace.) It's way too tricky for my taste, but it's fun to
play anyway. Has anyone done better so far? Here's a hint on my
strategy: the code contains three large integers. :-)
I see now how three large integers could be useful, but the best I could
do with that is 136 characters on 1-line. Yesterday that would have been
great, but it's not so hot today.
Also, here's another cheat version. (No, 7seg.com does not exist.)
import urllib2
def seven_seg(x):return urllib2.urlopen('http://7seg.com/'+x).read()
And another one from me as well.
class a:
def __eq__(s,o):return 1
seven_seg=lambda i:a()
-tim
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: python coding contest
Tim Hochberg wrote: py pan wrote: When you guys say 127~150 characters, did you guys mean usinging test_vectors.py in some way? Or there's no import at all? No import at all. The shortest solution reported so far is 131 characters. Getting down to 127 is just a guess as to where the lower bound is likely to be. Sorry about the 131, I had a spurious whitespace character so it should have been 130. The data is then extracted using some recipe involving shifts and s. My 130 character solution has a shift and an . My 133 character solution didn't. I feel sure that 130 isn't the limit, my guess would be that 127 or 128 ought to be possible. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: python coding contest
On Tue, 27 Dec 2005 14:02:57 -0700, Tim Hochberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Shane Hathaway wrote:
Paul McGuire wrote:
Also, here's another cheat version. (No, 7seg.com does not exist.)
import urllib2
def seven_seg(x):return urllib2.urlopen('http://7seg.com/'+x).read()
And another one from me as well.
class a:
def __eq__(s,o):return 1
seven_seg=lambda i:a()
This is shorter as __eq__=lambda s,o:1.
But I can't find the first post in this thread... What are you
guys talking about?
Jean-Paul
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: python coding contest
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I now have a version which passes the test suite in 32 bytes evil grin -T. After I have posted the statement, that I have one with 39 bytes, I had the 32 version five minutes later, but thougt that instead of posting it I can maybe use it as entry on the contest ... Now this hope is over and as the 32 bytes are the lowest possible limit I can currently think of the dream of winning the contest seems to be over. Anyone below 32 bytes? Claudio -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: python coding contest
Tim Hochberg wrote: Note that in principle it's possible to encode the data for how to display a digit in one byte. Thus it's at least theoretically possible to condense all of the information about the string into a string that's 10 bytes long. In practice it turns out to be hard to do that, since a 10 byte string will generally have a representation that is longer than 10 bytes because of the way the escape sequences get printed out. As a result various people seem to be encoding the data in long integers of one sort or another. The data is then extracted using some recipe involving shifts and s. -tim I have a 163 character version(on 8 lines, haven't tried to compress it further) that does something like that.. the string ended up being printable enough to be included in the source unescaped. I think for most approaches, any space you save by using a string you lose after quoting it and using ord() to turn a character back into a number. I'm sure this particular method is a dead end, but it is a very intersting and probably unique solution :-) -- - Justin -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: python coding contest
Jean-Paul Calderone wrote:
On Tue, 27 Dec 2005 14:02:57 -0700, Tim Hochberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Shane Hathaway wrote:
Paul McGuire wrote:
Also, here's another cheat version. (No, 7seg.com does not exist.)
import urllib2
def seven_seg(x):return urllib2.urlopen('http://7seg.com/'+x).read()
And another one from me as well.
class a:
def __eq__(s,o):return 1
seven_seg=lambda i:a()
This is shorter as __eq__=lambda s,o:1.
But I can't find the first post in this thread... What are you
guys talking about?
There's a contest described at http://www.pycontest.net/. People have
been working on two sorts of solutions: 'honest' solutions that actually
do what's described there. The best of these are around 130 characters.
There's also a set of 'cheat' solutions that fool the supplied test
program. I suspect that these will not pass muster when they actually
get submitted, but we'll see I suppose. A couple of people have figured
out how to write these cheating solution extremely compactly (32 bytes).
One of the simpler ones is:
import test;seven_seg=test.test_vectors.get
This will make sense if you look at the kit supplied by the above site.
-tim
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: python coding contest
James Tanis wrote: On 12/25/05, Simon Hengel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 I'm envisioning lots of convoluted one-liners which are more suitable to a different P-language... :-) I feel that python is more beautiful and readable, even if you write short programs. Looking at what I produced the last days, I'm not convinced... .. yes but there's a difference, some users of that other P-language seem to actually take some sort of ritualistic pride in their ability to condense code down to one convoluted line. The language is also a little more apt at it since it has a great deal of shorthand built in to the core language. Shorter is not necessarily better and I do support his opinion that reinforcing short as good isn't really what most programmers (who care about readability and quality) want to support. And that's what puzzled me a bit about the approach and the intent of this contest: Should this evolute into a language war about goals (shortness, conciseness, brevity, whatnot) that Python doesn't have as its main targets? Sure, I see myself hacking this unfortunate little 7-seg code until it becomes unreadable for me, the trap worked for me, but why do I do this??? ... I think code efficiency would be a better choice. A longer program is only worse if its wasting cycles on badly implemented algorithms. And we are of course implementing algorithms with a twisted goal-set in mind: How to express this the shortest way, not elegantly, just how to shave off one or even two bytes, re-iterating the possible algorithms again and again, just to find a version that is lexically shorter? To what a silly, autistic crowd of insane people do I belong? But it caught me, again! Code size is a really bad gauge, If your actually comparing size as in byte-to-byte comparison, you'll be getting a ton of implementations with absolutely no documentation and plenty of one letter variable names. I haven't checked the web site either, are you allowing third party modules to be used? If so, that causes even more problems in the comparison. How are you going to compare those who use a module vs implement it themselves in pure python? I think it is legal to use any standard pre-installed package you like, if it belongs to the set of default batteries included. In a sense, using these tools in a good manner, gives you some measure about how much the programmer knows about these batteries, and using them is ok. Actually, I don't see so much applications for the given problem, but in general, I like the idea to try many very different approaches to get to a maybe surprizing result. After all, I'd really love to set up another contest with different measures and criteria. One reason btw. might be that I'm not able to win this one, due to personal blocking. I can't really force myself to go all the ridiculous paths to save one byte. My keyboard blocks as well. Maybe I don't consider myself a hacker so much any longer :-) ciao - chris -- Christian Tismer :^) mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] tismerysoft GmbH : Have a break! Take a ride on Python's Johannes-Niemeyer-Weg 9A :*Starship* http://starship.python.net/ 14109 Berlin : PGP key - http://wwwkeys.pgp.net/ work +49 30 802 86 56 mobile +49 173 24 18 776 fax +49 30 80 90 57 05 PGP 0x57F3BF04 9064 F4E1 D754 C2FF 1619 305B C09C 5A3B 57F3 BF04 whom do you want to sponsor today? http://www.stackless.com/ -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: python coding contest
Scott David Daniels wrote: [--CUT---] 39 bytes... 53 bytes... It gives me the impression to follow a jet plane with a bike with my 179 bytes! [--CUT--] And I am sadly stuck at 169. Not even spitting distance from 149 (which sounds like a non-cheat version). Try harder! ;-) I thought I was stuck at 179 but with a strict diet, I managed to loose some bones :-D and get down to a one-liner of 153 bytes. No cheating with import but it's so ugly that I'm not sure I will understand my own code next month. And this time I'm sure at 99% that I'm really stuck... -- == Remi Villatel [EMAIL PROTECTED] == -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: python coding contest
Remi Villatel wrote: Scott David Daniels wrote: [--CUT---] 39 bytes... 53 bytes... It gives me the impression to follow a jet plane with a bike with my 179 bytes! [--CUT--] And I am sadly stuck at 169. Not even spitting distance from 149 (which sounds like a non-cheat version). Try harder! ;-) I thought I was stuck at 179 but with a strict diet, I managed to loose some bones :-D and get down to a one-liner of 153 bytes. No cheating with import but it's so ugly that I'm not sure I will understand my own code next month. And this time I'm sure at 99% that I'm really stuck... Don't try harder! Sit back and think of what you're doing, and what you'd like to do, instead. And then help me to setup a different contest about content -- chris -- Christian Tismer :^) mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] tismerysoft GmbH : Have a break! Take a ride on Python's Johannes-Niemeyer-Weg 9A :*Starship* http://starship.python.net/ 14109 Berlin : PGP key - http://wwwkeys.pgp.net/ work +49 30 802 86 56 mobile +49 173 24 18 776 fax +49 30 80 90 57 05 PGP 0x57F3BF04 9064 F4E1 D754 C2FF 1619 305B C09C 5A3B 57F3 BF04 whom do you want to sponsor today? http://www.stackless.com/ -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: python coding contest
Christian Tismer wrote: [SNIP] And then help me to setup a different contest about content -- chris As usual, I expect that actually having some working code measuring 'Pythonic' length (and I'm sure we could get into all sorts of fun arguments about the exact definition of that) would go a long way towards convincing the next contest thrower who's measuring length to use something a little less distorting than program length. I've been thinking about writing something, but I've been distracted. Perhaps I'll take a stab at it tomorrow and see what I come up with. That being said, the result I've come up with for the contest are pretty cool in a perverse way, at least while there it's spread out over six lines. Once it gets folded up, it become unbearable. And, sadly, it only saves 3 characters. If one was ignoring leading and trailing whitespace the unfolded version would be the much shorter of the two, but ya gotta play with the rules as they is. -tim -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: python coding contest
On 12/27/05, Christian Tismer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: And we are of course implementing algorithms with a twisted goal-setin mind: How to express this the shortest way, not elegantly,just how to shave off one or even two bytes, re-iterating thepossible algorithms again and again, just to find a version that is lexically shorter? To what a silly, autistic crowd of insane peopledo I belong? But it caught me, again!I personally think that it's a good practice. The experiences gatheredmight be useful in other applications in the future. That's where the excitement of learning new things is about.Actually, I don't see so much applications for the given problem, Something like this:http://j.domaindlx.com/elements28/wxpython/LEDCtrl.htmlconvinced me that there are application of this problem. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: python coding contest
Christian Tismer wrote: I feel that python is more beautiful and readable, even if you write short programs. Looking at what I produced the last days, I'm not convinced... Me neither. Especially since I've taken the one-liner road. Python can be very unreadable... sometimes. And that's what puzzled me a bit about the approach and the intent of this contest: Should this evolute into a language war about goals (shortness, conciseness, brevity, whatnot) that Python doesn't have as its main targets? Maybe to prove to the others that Python is a real language that can produce uglinesses too? Sure, I see myself hacking this unfortunate little 7-seg code until it becomes unreadable for me, the trap worked for me, but why do I do this??? For the pleasure of twisting your mind in every possible way, for the challenge, for the luxury price if you win? Whatever... I'm trapped too and I can't give any reason off the top of my head. [---CUT---] I think it is legal to use any standard pre-installed package you like, if it belongs to the set of default batteries included. [---CUT---] If you use more than the built-ins, you've already lost. It costs you at least 9 bytes, well, 10 since I don't know any module with a single-letter name. \t+import+ +name_of_module+\n And knowing how much I struggled to remove the last 10 bytes I removed from my code, the idea doesn't sound very attractive. After all, I'd really love to set up another contest with different measures and criteria. Go on! I don't think that shortest code is a very pythonic goal if you count in bytes. The same contest with the length of the code measured in pythonic units would be better. When I say pythonic unit, I mean to count 1 unit for each variable, literal, operator or key-word. That would be more pythonic. ...but maybe less challenging. To try to do with Python things it wasn't meant to do is more fun for a contest. ;-) -- == Remi Villatel [EMAIL PROTECTED] == -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: python coding contest
Simon Hengel wrote: Is it necessary to keep the input parameter as 'input'? Reducing that to a single character drops the length of a program by at least 8 characters. Technically it changes the interface of the function, so it's a little bogus, but test.py doesn't check. (Personally I prefer that if be illegal, but if it's legal I'll have to do it). You may change input to something more short, like x. Everything that passes the test, has a good chance to be accepted. How good is good for import test_vectors seven_seg = test_vectors.test_vectors.get or code using the test suite in general? Peter -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: python coding contest
taroso at gmail.com writes: Currently I'm on 149 characters in urgh one line - 128 without spaces/newlines. (it'd be three characters shorter if it didn't have to end with a \n) -T. unclean... unclean... are you importing zlib or bz2 ? -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: python coding contest
anonymous wrote: are you importing zlib or bz2 ? I don't think either of these would help in this case. While the length of the compressed string might be significantly shorter than your solution, the resulting string *literal* you decompress will contain a bunch of \-escaped characters, so it will end up being longer. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: python coding contest
I don't think either of these would help in this case. While the length of the compressed string might be significantly shorter than your solution, the resulting string *literal* you decompress will contain a bunch of \-escaped characters, so it will end up being longer. PS: I'm at 155, damn you taroso... -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: python coding contest
(Current status: 147 characters) Nope - no imports at all. The horrible thing is it's NOT the the most unpleasant piece of Python I've written. -T. A gentleman is someone who knows how to play the bagpipes but doesn't -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: python coding contest
* anonymous wrote: are you importing zlib or bz2 ? Haha, I've tried that myself. Funnily the bz2 result had exactly the same length as the original. Code with that entropy is... nasty ;) Still 179. It seems, I need to rethink the algorithm ;-) nd -- die (eval q-qq:Just Another Perl Hacker :-) # André Malo, http://www.perlig.de/ # -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: python coding contest
On Sun, 25 Dec 2005 16:39:47 +0100, Simon Hengel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello, we are hosting a python coding contest an we even managed to provide a price for the winner... ^ How much are you going to sell him or her for? ;-) Regards, Bengt Richter -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: python coding contest
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Currently I'm on 149 characters in urgh one line - 128 without spaces/newlines. (it'd be three characters shorter if it didn't have to end with a \n) It'll be interesting to see what the short 1-line answers look like. I have a hard time seeing how that's done. It'll especially be interesting to see if we're all using similar tricks or if the multiline attemps take a distinctly different tack than the single line attempts. Currently, I'm down to 137 characters now in 6 lines. There's very little left to trim at this point, so I don't know that I'll be able to knock it down any further using my current approach. And since I don't have any other approaches in the wings, I may be about washed up. -tim -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: python coding contest
* Tim Hochberg wrote: Currently, I'm down to 137 characters now in 6 lines. There's very little left to trim at this point, so I don't know that I'll be able to knock it down any further using my current approach. And since I don't have any other approaches in the wings, I may be about washed up. grmpf. Just reached 143 chars / 2 lines ;-) There seems to be some more room for optimization... nd -- package Hacker::Perl::Another::Just;print [EMAIL PROTECTED] split/::/ =__PACKAGE__]}~; # André Malo # http://pub.perlig.de # -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: python coding contest
You guys are pretty agressive! -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: python coding contest
omg, how do you guys do it? after 4 hours, i'm stucked at 182 chars, 8 lines. hint please... :D André Malo wrote: * Tim Hochberg wrote: Currently, I'm down to 137 characters now in 6 lines. There's very little left to trim at this point, so I don't know that I'll be able to knock it down any further using my current approach. And since I don't have any other approaches in the wings, I may be about washed up. grmpf. Just reached 143 chars / 2 lines ;-) There seems to be some more room for optimization... nd -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: python coding contest
Peter Otten wrote: Simon Hengel wrote: Is it necessary to keep the input parameter as 'input'? Reducing that to a single character drops the length of a program by at least 8 characters. Technically it changes the interface of the function, so it's a little bogus, but test.py doesn't check. (Personally I prefer that if be illegal, but if it's legal I'll have to do it). You may change input to something more short, like x. Everything that passes the test, has a good chance to be accepted. How good is good for import test_vectors seven_seg = test_vectors.test_vectors.get or code using the test suite in general? Peter This started to remind myself about the story of the contest where the shortest program beeing able to output own source was the job to code. The jury had a big trouble to justify why not give the prize to the one who posted an empty file ... I am currently at 39 bytes following the requirements and the principle given above (my module passes the test). Anyone able to beat that? Claudio -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: python coding contest
Claudio Grondi wrote: Peter Otten wrote: [SNIP] How good is good for import test_vectors seven_seg = test_vectors.test_vectors.get or code using the test suite in general? Peter This started to remind myself about the story of the contest where the shortest program beeing able to output own source was the job to code. The jury had a big trouble to justify why not give the prize to the one who posted an empty file ... I am currently at 39 bytes following the requirements and the principle given above (my module passes the test). Anyone able to beat that? Wow! It'll be interesting to see how to do that. The obvious way gives 53 bytes. Hmmm, I'll have to see what can be done... However they do say We use a very *similar* test suite to either accept or reject pending submissions. (Emphasis mine) So, it's possible, even probable, that the file test.py either won't be available or won't be helpful. -tim -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: python coding contest
Tim Hochberg wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Currently I'm on 149 characters in urgh one line - 128 without spaces/newlines. (it'd be three characters shorter if it didn't have to end with a \n) It'll be interesting to see what the short 1-line answers look like. I have a hard time seeing how that's done. It'll especially be interesting to see if we're all using similar tricks or if the multiline attemps take a distinctly different tack than the single line attempts. Currently, I'm down to 137 characters now in 6 lines. There's very little left to trim at this point, so I don't know that I'll be able to knock it down any further using my current approach. And since I don't have any other approaches in the wings, I may be about washed up. I think my main interest will be to see what different algorithms are successful. I suspect I may have chosen the wrong approach to start with since I stuck at 150 characters (1 line, no extraneous whitespace), but then I started again with a different algorithm and I'm down to one line of 137 characters but nowhere obvious to go from there... -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: python coding contest
Tim Hochberg wrote: Claudio Grondi wrote: Peter Otten wrote: [SNIP] How good is good for import test_vectors seven_seg = test_vectors.test_vectors.get or code using the test suite in general? Peter This started to remind myself about the story of the contest where the shortest program beeing able to output own source was the job to code. The jury had a big trouble to justify why not give the prize to the one who posted an empty file ... I am currently at 39 bytes following the requirements and the principle given above (my module passes the test). Anyone able to beat that? Wow! It'll be interesting to see how to do that. The obvious way gives 53 bytes. Hmmm, I'll have to see what can be done... However they do say We use a very *similar* test suite to either accept or reject pending submissions. (Emphasis mine) So, it's possible, even probable, that the file test.py either won't be available or won't be helpful. -tim Wouldn't using test_vectors.py somehow be lame? -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
