"Jasper McCrea" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb...
> I can't really imagine what it is. Unless it is a _really_ huge set of
> data. That would certainly throw a spanner in the works as far as my
> program goes.
Well, it is pretty huge, yes. In fact it is a 1000 nodes test.
The reason for this is that people have been using hardcoded limits to
detect loops. This puts a hardcoded limit to the number of nodes permitted.
As that's not the spirit of the game, the rules will be amended (yes, sorry,
yet again).
We will, iirc, lower the number of nodes in the long tests to something like
200. While this may even validate entries that were rejected because of the
1000 nodes test, those entries will still be moot because there should not
be hardcoded limits.
This really isn't a new rule, I think. The rules never stated that your
entry isn't supposed to work on a very large number of nodes. In fact, we
deliberately did not limit the number of nodes. Hence, we cannot allow
hardcoded limits.
v1.8 will be released as soon as J�r�me has the time to update it.
Hope this clarifies things,
Steffen
--
@n=(544290696690,305106661574,116357),$b=16,@c=' ,JPacehklnorstu'=~
/./g;for$n(@n){map{$h=int$n/$b**$_;$n-=$b**$_*$h;$c[@c]=$h}c(0..9);
push@p,map{$c[$_]}@c[c($b..$#c)];$#c=$b-1}print@p;sub'c{reverse @_}
