List of integers & L.I.S. (SPOILER)

n00m n00m at narod.ru
Sat Sep 10 10:52:24 CEST 2005


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 place heavy data testcase(s) at the end
of the (whole) input. Like this:

3
2 3 1
7
4 5 6 1 2 7 3
...
...
...
100000
456 2 6789 ... ... ... ... ... 55444 1 ... 234

Surely producing an answer for list [2, 3, 1] will
be "incredibly fast" for ANY language and for ANY
algorithm.

> My first version bombed for the zero-length sequence. That was a
> mistake, sorry, but it may not be one of their test-cases.
In my turn I can bet there's not an empty sequence testcase in the
input.

> I
> wonder how many of the accepted entries would perform properly.
Info of such kind they keep in secret (along with what the input
data are).

One more thing.
They (the e-judge's admins) are not gods and they don't warrant
that if they put 9 sec timelimit for a problem then this problem
can be "solved" in all accepted languages (e.g. in Python).

> I never intended to submit this program for competition.
"Competition" is not quite relevant word here. It just LOOKS as
if it is a "regular" competetion. There nobody blames anybody.
Moreover, judging on my own experience, there nobody is even
interested in anybody. It's just a fun (but very useful fun).




More information about the Python-list mailing list