This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - lirtosiast
16
« on: June 13, 2015, 10:26:27 pm »
Golf your solution by one more byte. You can do it!
17
« on: June 13, 2015, 09:43:54 pm »
So you have at most 36 bytes now, considering CKH4's 41 byte solution? That's below what I could get for a "sane" entry.
18
« on: June 13, 2015, 09:10:56 pm »
Wait a minute... you shaved four bytes off your solution, not my 27-byte solution, right?
19
« on: June 13, 2015, 09:05:08 pm »
c4ooo: Let me guess: two getKeys near each other that both need to register in order to update the cursor?
CKH4, I'm interested to see your 41-byte solution and how similar it is to one of my earlier attempts.
20
« on: June 13, 2015, 10:49:57 am »
If we count Axe as machine code size, then we should score it in the same category as assembly, which gives it a distinct disadvantage. EDIT: Sorry, my clumsy fingers on mobile accidentally rated this post one star.  Is there a way to undo it?
21
« on: June 13, 2015, 10:48:12 am »
Keith numbers. Interesting...
EDIT: I have a program to check if a number is a Keith number in 54 bytes.
Maybe I can be the first entrant to win an Omnimaga code golf contest before it's formally announced.
22
« on: June 13, 2015, 12:08:30 am »
I agree with Art_of_camelot. The existence of a better solution shouldn't prevent anybody from submitting one.
23
« on: June 12, 2015, 02:55:58 pm »
Finally an Axe answer. That's the source, not the machine code, right?
24
« on: June 12, 2015, 02:13:21 pm »
I would have had 26, but on one out of every literally hundreds of billions of keypresses that solution sometimes moves the pixel over by one.
A small hint: In my official solution, there is only one "getKey", and I don't store it to any variable, not even Ans.
25
« on: June 11, 2015, 11:07:47 pm »
I have competed in ARML and AMC/AIME/USAMO, but my school doesn't have a math team.
26
« on: June 11, 2015, 10:20:54 pm »
No, not just placement—there are only a few dozen ways at most to rearrange statements in a given algorithm.
27
« on: June 11, 2015, 10:01:07 pm »
Just be very sure you actually avoided any key repeat, because pimath is (justifiably) strict at ensuring it works.
Actually, about 1070. Of course I can't really write them all out, but I could theoretically.
28
« on: June 11, 2015, 08:51:38 pm »
I could write literally 1030 distinct 57-byte solutions, so I'm not sure that ben_g's is the same as yours.
That's without the header, right?
29
« on: June 11, 2015, 07:33:24 pm »
Art_of_camelot, did you remember to avoid key repeat? That was tricky for me.
30
« on: June 11, 2015, 07:26:06 pm »
The TI operating system has some sort of nine-byte header that it uses to store information about the program; that shouldn't count.
The size of a program name is the number of characters in it; one character=one byte.
|
Show Posts
