Thank you both for your replies.
And my personal "Thank you!" to Mr. Hettinger for
all his tremendous work!
> Perhaps because you are not using a real Usenet client?
Yes! And I don't even know what is the beast - Usenet client.
I just keep in Favorites of my browser (IE 6.0) this link:
http://grou
n00m wrote:
> Got it! He is a kind of pythonic monsters.
>
> Btw, why it's impossible to reply to old threads?
> Namely, there're no more "Reply" link in them.
> Only "Reply to author" etc.
Perhaps because you are not using a real Usenet client?
Reinhold
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listin
"n00m" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Who is Raymond Hettinger?
The Python developer who, in the last few years, has perhaps been the most
active in coding or recoding library modules, such as itertools and sets,
in C. He also partipates in development discussio
Got it! He is a kind of pythonic monsters.
Btw, why it's impossible to reply to old threads?
Namely, there're no more "Reply" link in them.
Only "Reply to author" etc.
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
n00m wrote:
> Tim Peters wrote:
>> The chance that Raymond Hettinger is going to recode _your_
>> functions in C is approximately 0 ;-)
> Who is Raymond Hettinger?
See python-dev and, wrt this thread,
http://docs.python.org/whatsnew/node12.html.
Reinhold
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listin
Tim Peters wrote:
> The chance that Raymond Hettinger is going to recode _your_
> functions in C is approximately 0 ;-)
Who is Raymond Hettinger?
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
[Tim Peters, on the problem at
http://spoj.sphere.pl/problems/SUPPER/
]
>> Oh, it's not that bad . I took a stab at a Python program for
>> this, and it passed (3.44 seconds).
>> ...
>> I didn't make any effort to speed this, beyond picking a reasonable
>> algorithm, so maybe someone else can
Tim Peters wrote:
> [Bryan Olson, on the problem at
> http://spoj.sphere.pl/problems/SUPPER/
> ]
>
>>I never intended to submit this program for competition. The
>>contest ranks in speed order, and there is no way Python can
>>compete with truly-compiled languages on such low-level code.
[Tim Peters, on the problem at
http://spoj.sphere.pl/problems/SUPPER/
]
>> ...
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> INCREDIBLE~
> 241433 2005-09-11 04:23:40 Tim Peters accepted 3.44 7096 PYTH
> BRAVO!
It's different now ;-) I added the two lines
import psyco
psyco.full()
and time dropped to 2.29, while
Tim Peters;
INCREDIBLE~
> 241433 2005-09-11 04:23:40 Tim Peters accepted 3.44 7096 PYTH
BRAVO!
I just wonder have I grey cells enough for to understand how your
algo works... and hopefully it's not your last solved problem on
the contester.
> I'm pretty sure they're using
> slower HW than mine
[Bryan Olson, on the problem at
http://spoj.sphere.pl/problems/SUPPER/
]
> I never intended to submit this program for competition. The
> contest ranks in speed order, and there is no way Python can
> compete with truly-compiled languages on such low-level code.
> I'd bet money that the algorit
Bryan;
My own version also timed out.
And now I can tell: it's incredibly SLOW.
Nevertheless it would be interesting to compare
speed of my code against yours. I can't do it myself
because my Python is of 2.3.4 version.
Just uncomment "your" part.
import bisect
def oops(w,a,b):
for m in w:
Bryan Olson wrote:
> Could be. Yet you did write:
>> It's incredibly fast!
I just was obliged to exclaim "It's incredibly fast!"
because I THOUGHT your first version handled ALL TEN
testcases from the input. But the code read from the
*20-lines* input *ONLY 2* its first lines.
Usually they pl
n00m wrote:
> It also timed out:(
Could be. Yet you did write:
> It's incredibly fast!
I never intended to submit this program for competition. The
contest ranks in speed order, and there is no way Python can
compete with truly-compiled languages on such low-level code.
I'd bet money that t
PS:
ALL problems in problems.PDF file (weekly updated):
http://spoj.sphere.pl/problems.pdf
The friendliest online contester I've ever seen! JUST A NON-SUCH.
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
It also timed out:(
241056 2005-09-09 20:11:19 ZZZ time limit exceeded - 7064 PYTH
Btw, have a look at this nicest problem:
http://spoj.sphere.pl/problems/COINS/
My py solution takes #64 place among its best solutions:
http://spoj.sphere.pl/ranks/COINS/start=60
--
http://mail.python.org/m
n00m wrote:
> Oh!
> Seems you misunderstand me!
> See how the last block in your code should look:
>
> for tc in range(10):
> _ = stdin.readline()
> sequence = [int(ch) for ch in stdin.readline().split()]
> supers = supernumbers(sequence)
> print len(supers)
> for i in
Oh!
Seems you misunderstand me!
See how the last block in your code should look:
for tc in range(10):
_ = stdin.readline()
sequence = [int(ch) for ch in stdin.readline().split()]
supers = supernumbers(sequence)
print len(supers)
for i in supers:
print i,
When I submi
n00m wrote:
> Oops Bryan... I've removed my reply that you refer to...
> See my previous - CORRECT - reply. The code just times
> out... In some sense it doesn't matter right or wrong is
> its output.
If my code times out, then they are using an archaic platform.
With respect to my code, you n
> nor even what submission is yours and your latest.
Oops.. my UserName there is ZZZ.
Submissions in the html table are ordered by date DESC.
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Oops Bryan... I've removed my reply that you refer to...
See my previous - CORRECT - reply. The code just times
out... In some sense it doesn't matter right or wrong is
its output.
Btw, what is the complexity of your algorithm?
Currently I'm at work and it's not easy for me to concentrate
on our su
n00m wrote:
> Bravo, Bryan!
> It's incredibly fast!
Not compared to a good implementation for a compiled, low-level
language.
> But your code got WA (wrong answer).
> See my latest submission: http://spoj.sphere.pl/status/SUPPER/
> Maybe you slipped a kind of typo in it? Silly boundary cases
Bravo, Bryan!
Looks very neat! (pity I can't give it a try in my Py 2.3.4
because of reversed() and sorted() functions)
And I've submitted it but got ... TLEs:
http://spoj.sphere.pl/status/SUPPER/
Funnily, the exec.time of the best C solution is only 0.06s!
PS
In my 1st submission I overlooked tha
Bravo, Bryan!
It's incredibly fast! But your code got WA (wrong answer).
See my latest submission: http://spoj.sphere.pl/status/SUPPER/
Maybe you slipped a kind of typo in it? Silly boundary cases?
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
n00m wrote:
> Firstly I find ordering numbers when moving from left to the right;
> then I find ord. numbers for backward direction AND for DECREASING
> subsequences:
Sounds good.
> Btw, I did it in Pascal. Honestly, I don't believe it can
> be done in Python (of course I mean only the impo
25 matches
Mail list logo
