Newest at the top
| 2026-02-24 23:31:19 +0100 | <tomsmeding> | or is there a little loop or something involved |
| 2026-02-24 23:31:07 +0100 | <tomsmeding> | lantti: do you determine what numbers to print in constant time? |
| 2026-02-24 23:30:21 +0100 | <lantti> | of course I don't know if any other students are reading this |
| 2026-02-24 23:29:56 +0100 | <lantti> | tomsmeding: I already passed so you won't boost my grade with it |
| 2026-02-24 23:28:43 +0100 | terrorjack | (~terrorjac@2a01:4f8:271:2d98::2) terrorjack |
| 2026-02-24 23:28:21 +0100 | <tomsmeding> | (I'm not sure if it's responsible to post my solution publically for people to scrutinise) |
| 2026-02-24 23:27:25 +0100 | <tomsmeding> | and I can assure you that I am actually doing work that should take <10us plus `putStrLn . unwords . map show` on a lazy list of Int |
| 2026-02-24 23:26:41 +0100 | <tomsmeding> | it seems printing is actually rather slow on that judge server! On roughly 260000 I take 0.08s, on roughly 653000 I take 0.21s, and on 1000000 I take 0.30s |
| 2026-02-24 23:26:22 +0100 | <haskellbridge> | <ijouw> yes, it is (n*(n+1))/2 |
| 2026-02-24 23:25:48 +0100 | <geekosaur> | `sum [1..n]` isn't there a number theory approach for that? |
| 2026-02-24 23:25:35 +0100 | peterbecich | (~Thunderbi@71.84.33.135) (Ping timeout: 245 seconds) |
| 2026-02-24 23:24:58 +0100 | <tomsmeding> | and I'm not sure where even that 0.30s comes from; it takes less than 1ms on that input on my machine |
| 2026-02-24 23:24:08 +0100 | merijn | (~merijn@host-cl.cgnat-g.v4.dfn.nl) (Ping timeout: 268 seconds) |
| 2026-02-24 23:23:28 +0100 | <tomsmeding> | it's a fun problem :) |
| 2026-02-24 23:23:02 +0100 | <tomsmeding> | (I figured out a way to compute what numbers to print in constant time; then I just have to print all those numbers) |
| 2026-02-24 23:21:16 +0100 | <tomsmeding> | lantti: I'm not sure what you did, but it can probably be done more efficiently; this is haskell with `putStrLn . unwords . map show` https://tomsmeding.com/ss/get/tomsmeding/RnFf4z |
| 2026-02-24 23:19:53 +0100 | tremon | (~tremon@83.80.159.219) (Quit: getting boxed in) |
| 2026-02-24 23:19:31 +0100 | petrichor | (~jez@user/petrichor) petrichor |
| 2026-02-24 23:19:06 +0100 | merijn | (~merijn@host-cl.cgnat-g.v4.dfn.nl) merijn |
| 2026-02-24 23:17:50 +0100 | gmc | (sid58314@id-58314.ilkley.irccloud.com) gmc |
| 2026-02-24 23:17:39 +0100 | gmc | (sid58314@id-58314.ilkley.irccloud.com) (Server closed connection) |
| 2026-02-24 23:17:36 +0100 | <newmind> | mauke: did you get nerdsniped there? |
| 2026-02-24 23:17:05 +0100 | <mauke> | hah, no. I was wrong about being wrong. I just did it backwards :-) |
| 2026-02-24 23:15:12 +0100 | <mauke> | nvm, I'm blind |
| 2026-02-24 23:13:01 +0100 | <mauke> | 1 + 2 = 3 |
| 2026-02-24 23:12:45 +0100 | <mauke> | ah, I see it |
| 2026-02-24 23:11:53 +0100 | petrichor | (~jez@user/petrichor) (Ping timeout: 248 seconds) |
| 2026-02-24 23:10:01 +0100 | abiss27 | (~abiss27@user/abiss) abiss |
| 2026-02-24 23:08:07 +0100 | merijn | (~merijn@host-cl.cgnat-g.v4.dfn.nl) (Ping timeout: 264 seconds) |
| 2026-02-24 23:04:47 +0100 | <haskellbridge> | <ijouw> Working on it |
| 2026-02-24 23:04:44 +0100 | <tomsmeding> | (there is, but figuring out what the splitting is, requires a little trick) |
| 2026-02-24 23:04:35 +0100 | target_i | (~target_i@user/target-i/x-6023099) (Quit: leaving) |
| 2026-02-24 23:04:32 +0100 | peterbecich | (~Thunderbi@71.84.33.135) peterbecich |
| 2026-02-24 23:04:25 +0100 | <tomsmeding> | ijouw: do you have a proof that if sum [1..n] is even, there is such a splitting? |
| 2026-02-24 23:04:21 +0100 | takuan | (~takuan@d8D86B9E9.access.telenet.be) (Ping timeout: 255 seconds) |
| 2026-02-24 23:03:59 +0100 | <haskellbridge> | <ijouw> Isn't the two sets algorithm discussed above easy to compute? The question is whether the sum [1..n] is even (solvable in constant time) (or am I missing something?). Printing could indeed be slowest part. |
| 2026-02-24 23:03:14 +0100 | philderbeast | (~philderbe@57-134-39-54.resi.cgocable.ca) (Client Quit) |
| 2026-02-24 23:02:15 +0100 | humasect | (~humasect@dyn-192-249-132-90.nexicom.net) (Quit: Leaving...) |
| 2026-02-24 23:01:40 +0100 | Milan_Vanca | (~milan@user/Milan-Vanca:32634) (Quit: WeeChat 4.7.2) |
| 2026-02-24 23:01:02 +0100 | merijn | (~merijn@host-cl.cgnat-g.v4.dfn.nl) merijn |
| 2026-02-24 23:00:27 +0100 | ChaiTRex | (~ChaiTRex@user/chaitrex) ChaiTRex |
| 2026-02-24 22:59:44 +0100 | Guest81 | (~Guest81@52.144.37.132) () |
| 2026-02-24 22:59:39 +0100 | philderbeast | (~philderbe@57-134-39-54.resi.cgocable.ca) |
| 2026-02-24 22:58:31 +0100 | ChaiTRex | (~ChaiTRex@user/chaitrex) (Client Quit) |
| 2026-02-24 22:57:44 +0100 | <EvanR> | repl is overrated, you want to load a file anyway. Then reload |
| 2026-02-24 22:57:07 +0100 | <tomsmeding> | that's probably easiest, yes (use ghcup) |
| 2026-02-24 22:56:55 +0100 | <Guest81> | So i need ghci. Thanks all. |
| 2026-02-24 22:55:48 +0100 | <tomsmeding> | ghci does quite a bit more than just an interpreter for basic expressions, and "learn you a haskell" assumes ghci |
| 2026-02-24 22:55:46 +0100 | <mauke> | a = [1,2,3] is not an expression |
| 2026-02-24 22:55:35 +0100 | <tomsmeding> | it is an interpreter, but not ghci |