I should add:
On Wed, Dec 14, 2022 at 4:19 PM I wrote:
...
> Here, OP was a gerund such that OP@.0 represented what monkey 0 would
> do to the "worry levels", OP@.1 represented monkey 1, and so on.
Note that a better representation here would interpret each monkey's
operation as a polynomial
On Wed, Dec 14, 2022 at 3:49 PM Jaume wrote:
> The first days I tried, now I have less time and the problems are harder.
That does happen.
I expect aoc day 24 to take me a few days to solve (unless it happens
to be a problem I somehow have already put a lot of thought into).
> I have to say
Missatge de Raul Miller del dia dc., 14 de des.
2022 a les 18:33:
> On Wed, Dec 14, 2022 at 2:26 AM Jaume wrote:
> > Because somewhere in there something broke and on the phone I have the
> > wrong answer for part 1.
>
> Yes... generally it's easier to debug if you have a much smaller
>
Well done! Day 13 has been unlucky for me; still floundering around, not even
managing to solve the example.
Anyway, I also always try to solve the example first, if I can. One, perhaps
two, of the earlier problems did have a feature that didn't appear in the
example, though. The
On Wed, Dec 14, 2022 at 2:26 AM Jaume wrote:
> Because somewhere in there something broke and on the phone I have the
> wrong answer for part 1.
Yes... generally it's easier to debug if you have a much smaller implementation.
It's also a *lot* easier if you write your code so that you can test
Thank you, this was the tip I needed.
Last night I managed to get the correct answer on the phone with this.
If you want to examine what I have it's on the same place. solution.ijs has
the latest I did on the computer, 1.ijs is what I had on the phone.
Because somewhere in there something broke
Oh, one other thing...
For aoc 13 part 2, you do not actually need to sort anything.
You can compare the '[[2]]' representation against each value and
count how many precede it.
Then you can do the same with the other value (adding 1, because it
would come after the '[[2]]' value.
FYI,
--
I was not able to decipher the value of pp which you posted here,
after the email system mangled it.
Also, it looks like your current github code --
https://github.com/JaumeGreen/adventofcode/blob/master/2022/day13/explanation.ijs
-- doesn't work for me when I try it on my input.txt from the aoc
Thank you
I think it's going better, or at least I'm understanding a bit more.
The problem I had was another, quicksort was sending the whole list to
compare inside comp2.
I fixed it with these:
quickp=: 3 : 0
if. 1 >: #y do. y
else.
(quickp y lesser sel e),(y equal sel e),quickp y greater sel
p.s. for the tacit stack issue, you did not include your definition of
comp2, but if it's from aoc day 13, a plausible issue is that comp2
would be returning _1 or 1 instead of 0 or 1 (which is what that
quicksort implementation expects).
That said, when debugging stack errors on recursive
It used to be that x was more ambiguous. To make quicksort work, use
sel=: 1 : 'u # ['
I will update the wiki.
Thanks,
--
Raul
On Tue, Dec 13, 2022 at 1:43 PM Jaume wrote:
>
> Hello all
>
> Still here and I've done all the days in J except for day 7, But that's not
> why I'm here.
>
> So
Hello all
Still here and I've done all the days in J except for day 7, But that's not
why I'm here.
So now I've done the first part, and I have a function that is too long to
copy that does comparisons in an iterative way (I had some stack problems).
Now I'm wanting to sort the elements using
12 matches
Mail list logo
