The problems they come up with are designed to require clever algorithms, and generally not require a fast language or better hardware. Good algorithms solve the hardest problems in under a minute. Naive algorithms take years. There is a very wide gulf between them that cannot be bridged by faster hardware.
Though I did have trouble with one of the 2008 practice problems solve the large dataset in 20 min. A better language, or a faster system (mine is about 6 years old) would probably have made the difference there. But that is a very unusual case. I program in Java, and am mystified as to why it isn't used more by the top contestants. For problems like this I'll argue that it is a far superior choice that C/C++. The execution speed penalty is minmal, and the language checks for array bounds and variable type safety should be a big help in getting a solution coded and out the door in a minimal amount of time. On Friday 04 September 2009 00:48:51 Monang Setyawan wrote: > I think the algorithm have more impact than language choice, at least in > contest like this one. > > On Fri, Sep 4, 2009 at 2:42 PM, Dhruva Sagar <[email protected]> wrote: > > For the large input, my solution did take long, but it was lesser than a > > minute in my knowledge.The best solutions are almost always in C/C++ > > > > Thanks & Regards, > > Dhruva Sagar. > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "google-codejam" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-code?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
