I am know a little about google code and I know enough to know that i
want my work from www.nicholaslawson.com to reside as an open source
project on google code ... symbolically it would be amazing for this
to work. I have the book at the above address and I would like to
create a version
You can still advance if there are some coders who cheated.
Don't give up~
2012. 5. 6., 오후 11:31, Ryszard Wiśniewski 작성:
I made a small tool to read GCJ statistics. Seems I'm the guy with the lowest
average rank of 1A, 1B, 1C and still out of Round 2 :-/ zjx20 was also a bad
lucker getting
During the contest my first attempt for solving the problem was to find the
class having more than tow out degrees.
Starting from this class i apply union and find algorithm (which is use to
detect cycle while constructing minimum spanning tree).
This algorithm didnt work. I am still not getting
Considering the case : A inherits from B C D,
B and C inherits from E.
In this case Diamond is formed between A B C E. hence =2 outdegree
On Mon, May 7, 2012 at 12:41 PM, Manmeet Singh mans.aus...@gmail.comwrote:
why more than 2, even 2 is ok
On Mon, May 7, 2012 at 11:34 AM, Satyajit
I will like to hear others opinions.
But this was a pretty straight forward problem. As from the problem
statements:
*You may assume that: *
- *If there is an inheritance path from X to Y then there is no
inheritance path from Y to X.*
- *A class will never inherit from itself*.
This
I have solved the problem using DFSjust wanted to know why Union and
Find failand yes Graph was directed so that might be the reason why it
failed
On Mon, May 7, 2012 at 1:12 PM, vivek dhiman vivek4dhi...@gmail.com wrote:
I will like to hear others opinions.
But this was a pretty
If it's any consolation, you did much better than me (and I consider my
coding skills to be pretty solid).
So, congratulations on doing so well!
On Sunday, May 6, 2012 9:31:06 AM UTC-5, Ryszard Wiśniewski wrote:
I made a small tool to read GCJ statistics. Seems I'm the guy with the
Hi Satyajit,
I only glanced at this problem (slept through this round :-), but it seemed
like the obvious solutions is to just run DFS, checking that we never
encounter a vertex twice (if I understood the problem).
When you mention union-find, I am thinking of Kruskal's algorithm, but it's
+1.
On Apr 21, 3:06 am, Chris Knott christopher.r.kn...@googlemail.com
wrote:
Hi guys, I have been putting up my solutions for GCJ past problems on my
website;http://chrk.atwebpages.com/index.php?title=Main_Page
I have got solutions for 90 problems so far, I will hopefully add most of
the
+2.
On 6 May 2012, at 18:53, yiuyuho yiuy...@gmail.com wrote:
+1.
On Apr 21, 3:06 am, Chris Knott christopher.r.kn...@googlemail.com
wrote:
Hi guys, I have been putting up my solutions for GCJ past problems on my
website;http://chrk.atwebpages.com/index.php?title=Main_Page
I have got
My algorithm :
1. Create a 2D array a[n][n] where a[i][j] = No. of paths poissible
from i to j .
2. Initialize all elements of a[][] to zero.
3. For each vertex i from 1 to N
(a) Read the list of vertices it is connected to. For each
vertex V in the list increment a[i][V].
(b) For all
It is a wiki so I guess you accept contributions, but how can one propose
and alternative approach?
Should I just add the alternative solution below yours?
A.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Google Code Jam group.
To view this discussion on the
It's not open for editting at the moment, but will be when I get a bit of
time (had trouble with spam bots on other wikis). I guess a good way for
alternate solutions would be to have a new page with a separate analysis
and solution, and then at the bottom of each page, links to the alternate
Woops! I didn't notice that it is a closed wiki. How would you accept
contributions?
A.
On Monday, 7 May 2012 21:43:50 UTC+2, A wrote:
It is a wiki so I guess you accept contributions, but how can one propose
and alternative approach?
Should I just add the alternative solution below
If you want to paste them to paste2.org I can add them myself I guess. I
just need to set up a captcha then people will be able to make a username
and edit stuff. I'll try and do it some time next week when I get some
time. I have a load more solutions to upload as well, just haven't written
Here are commented solutions...
http://paste2.org/p/2012908
http://paste2.org/p/2012907
http://paste2.org/p/2012904
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Google Code Jam group.
To view this discussion on the web visit
Thanks--these are awesome! (though their simplicity does make me feel
a bit dense)
One question: You're testing convergence using an equality operation
on floats. Is there any chance we might encounter some sort of
oscillation in the least significant bit (e.g., due to some sort of
quantization
I think your algorithm will not always correctly join the paths.
Take a simple example
1-[2]
2-[3]
3-[]
You will increment a[1][2]
then a[2][3], then a[1][3]
But if the rows were the other way around:
1-[]
2-[1]
3-[2]
You will increment a[2][1]
Then a[3][2], but you won't increment a[3][1],
Very nice. I have a version of Safety in Numbers that I consider just a
tiny bit simpler:
http://codejamdaemon.blogspot.it/2012/05/safety-in-numbers-gcj-2012-round-1b.html
A.
On Monday, 7 May 2012 22:10:55 UTC+2, Chris Knott wrote:
Here are commented solutions...
http://paste2.org/p/2012908
No, I don't think so because it relies on the = operator working properly
- which it does. Basically, you are at some point going to get the same set
of numbers again in 'small', so this calculation will produce exactly the
same bits, as it is the same calculation, not just the same number in a
I see your point in general, but it is not a problem in this case for two
reasons:
1. the calculation is exactly the same so you are assured that you will
reach the exact same IEEE752 float
2. the termination of the while rely on an inequality not on the an
equality == so even in a world with
Yes I agree that is a bit nicer
On Monday, May 7, 2012 9:54:25 PM UTC+1, A wrote:
Very nice. I have a version of Safety in Numbers that I consider just a
tiny bit simpler:
http://codejamdaemon.blogspot.it/2012/05/safety-in-numbers-gcj-2012-round-1b.html
A.
On Monday, 7 May 2012
Sorry the above reply was to tutufan, not you. I deleted the quoted text
and didn't realise it made it hard to tell who I was talking to. I agree
feel safer to have a check rather than ==
On Monday, May 7, 2012 10:42:12 PM UTC+1, A wrote:
I see your point in general, but it is not a problem
The official analysis for this round has just been posted. Please enjoy
our lengthy explanations and super-consistent formatting!
P.S. Challenge task: See if you can guess which problem's editorial was
written by a math major, using *only the text of the editorial*.
--
You received this
The video has been found!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embeddedv=vQ35aWcjIE0#!
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Google Code Jam group.
To post to this group, send email to google-code@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group,
The video has finally been found. Here it is at last!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vQ35aWcjIE0
On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 11:05 AM, vivek dhiman vivek4dhi...@gmail.comwrote:
Thank You!
On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 11:08 PM, Sabrina Welch Joyce
sabr...@google.comwrote:
Hi Vivek,
The video is
yay! :) :)
thanks
On Tue, May 8, 2012 at 5:41 AM, Bartholomew Furrow fur...@gmail.com wrote:
The video has finally been found. Here it is at last!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vQ35aWcjIE0
On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 11:05 AM, vivek dhiman vivek4dhi...@gmail.comwrote:
Thank You!
On Mon,
27 matches
Mail list logo
