En r�ponse � Rick Klement <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Philippe 'BooK' Bruhat wrote: > > > Does this prevent the entry to enter the "unorthodox" category too? > > Even "unorthodox" entries have to pass the tests > and be accepted by the referees.
Well, it passes the tests (timeout is a rule, not a test). So the question is "will it be accepted by the referees?". I have another "unorthodox" entry that uses a Perl function I guess nobody has used yet, but I needs so much memory that it breaks very early. The algorithm is good, and given enough time and memory (enough to store n^n precomputed output strings, n being the number of nodes in the graph), it can give a correct answer. :-) I can't recall if it's been rejected or not. But I put it in the unorthodox category because of this. Correct, but doesn't pass the tests. I had the feeling that "unorthodox" was for entries that couldn't quite run in the main course, because they used a stupid or unexpected algorithm. That's what these did (I think). -- Philippe BRUHAT - BooK Financez le d�veloppement de Perl, avec YAS et les Mongueurs de Perl ! http://www.mongueurs.net/association/actions/pdg2002.html
