That wouldn't work because there are several different output files that would be considered successful. They all describe the same solution, but could have different whitespace separators. And I think the idea is that you are supposed to be pretty confident that you have the right algorithm before you make the large dataset submission. They certainly could have given you immediate feedback on whether or not you were correct, but have chosen not to.
The fact that you only get one shot at the large dataset upload is somewhat disturbing. I agree with the principal that you should only get one upload shot, but it would be safer if I could download multiple times before uploading an answer. The usual reason would, of course, be because my first try didn't compute an answer in the required amount of time and I need to tweak the algorithm some more. But there are other reasons, like a badly timed power failure or system crash, that might prevent me from getting a perfectly good answer uploaded in the required time interval. On Friday 04 September 2009 06:33:28 Vexorian wrote: > 25 hours of paranoia regarding the probability I submitted the wrong > large output for all three problems have lead me to think about this > idea: > > The first line on all input files would be hash calculated from the > rest of the file. The output must begin with a line that had this hash > as well. If this hash is wrong, codejam will ignore your output > submission and ask you to do it again. > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
