Timeline for Build an Electrical Grid
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
40 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 12, 2018 at 1:05 | vote | accept | Colera Su | ||
| Dec 9, 2017 at 2:05 | comment | added | Οurous | Congratulations on winning the first bounty! | |
| Dec 9, 2017 at 1:19 | history | bounty ended | Colera Su | ||
| Dec 8, 2017 at 20:14 | comment | added | Οurous | @AndersKaseorg I'll get started then, thanks. | |
| Dec 8, 2017 at 14:30 | history | edited | Colera Su | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
deleted 47 characters in body
|
| Dec 8, 2017 at 14:07 | history | edited | Anders Kaseorg | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Document complexity
|
| Dec 8, 2017 at 14:00 | history | edited | Anders Kaseorg | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Some explanation
|
| Dec 8, 2017 at 13:52 | history | edited | Anders Kaseorg | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Even faster algorithm
|
| Dec 8, 2017 at 12:03 | comment | added | Anders Kaseorg | @Οurous The degree of originality in your answer depends on the degree of originality in your answer, I guess? | |
| Dec 8, 2017 at 11:53 | history | edited | Anders Kaseorg | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Small optimizations
|
| Dec 8, 2017 at 11:21 | comment | added | Οurous | @AndersKaseorg Sorry, SMAWK (autocorrect). I'd like to use it as a base for a solution, but as you used it first, I was asking if you'd object / feel like I was encroaching on your answer. It wouldn't be a literal translation of your solution (unlike one of the C ones). | |
| Dec 8, 2017 at 11:21 | history | edited | Anders Kaseorg | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Remove unnecessary &
|
| Dec 8, 2017 at 10:51 | history | edited | Anders Kaseorg | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Small optimizations
|
| Dec 8, 2017 at 10:28 | history | edited | Anders Kaseorg | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Small optimizations
|
| Dec 8, 2017 at 10:10 | comment | added | Anders Kaseorg | @ColeraSu Here’s a third algorithm that’s even faster! | |
| Dec 8, 2017 at 10:10 | history | edited | Anders Kaseorg | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Even faster algorithm
|
| Dec 5, 2017 at 1:57 | comment | added | ngn | @AndersKaseorg ok, this is better - only ~50% slower than C | |
| Dec 5, 2017 at 1:45 | comment | added | ngn | @AndersKaseorg you guessed correctly, mine: 1.14.0, tio: 1.21.0 | |
| Dec 5, 2017 at 1:21 | comment | added | Anders Kaseorg | @ngn It compiles fine at the TIO link. Perhaps your rustc version is too old? | |
| Dec 4, 2017 at 23:57 | comment | added | ngn | @AndersKaseorg The current Rust source doesn't compile (or am I doing something wrong?), so I tested against the old source. The C translation I posted is about twice as fast. | |
| Dec 4, 2017 at 23:32 | comment | added | ngn | @AndersKaseorg Strip takes it from a few MB down to hundreds of kB. For comparison, my binary is a little more than 3 kB but I did go out of my way to get rid of libc. | |
| Dec 4, 2017 at 23:17 | comment | added | Anders Kaseorg |
@ngn Wow, this was definitely not intended to be an introduction to Rust. Perhaps you don’t realize how little these abstractions actually cost (and that they are not “imposed”), but you’ll find that out soon enough. To make your comparison fair, I’ve gone and turned off bounds checking on the vector accesses. As for binary size, did you try strip?
|
|
| Dec 4, 2017 at 23:12 | history | edited | Anders Kaseorg | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Skip bounds checking
|
| Dec 4, 2017 at 22:02 | comment | added | ngn | @AndersKaseorg My only experience with Rust is this post, a few examples and a presentation on YouTube. First impressions: too verbose, imposes unnecessary abstractions, static typing only gets in the way. To be fair, Rust binaries are surprisingly fast despite their size, and I find rustc's error messages helpful. I'm actually trying to rewrite your code in C (not my favourite language either - I'm an APL/J/k fan) to see if it's any faster and I'll post as non-competing it if I'm successful. | |
| Dec 4, 2017 at 21:08 | comment | added | Anders Kaseorg | @ngn What do you have against Rust? :-( | |
| Dec 4, 2017 at 15:46 | comment | added | ngn | @AndersKaseorg Impressive! The algorithm is brilliant, the programming language - not so much. | |
| Dec 3, 2017 at 14:39 | comment | added | Colera Su |
Wow, I had never thought of SMAWK algorithm. Nice job, you got 73.
|
|
| Dec 3, 2017 at 13:55 | history | edited | Colera Su | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
edited body
|
| Dec 3, 2017 at 13:49 | history | edited | Colera Su | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
deleted 53 characters in body
|
| Dec 3, 2017 at 12:18 | history | edited | Anders Kaseorg | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 306 characters in body
|
| Dec 3, 2017 at 12:08 | history | edited | Anders Kaseorg | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
More optimization
|
| Dec 3, 2017 at 11:49 | history | edited | Anders Kaseorg | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
More optimization
|
| Dec 3, 2017 at 10:33 | history | edited | Anders Kaseorg | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Improved version
|
| Dec 3, 2017 at 9:33 | history | edited | Colera Su | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
edited body
|
| Dec 3, 2017 at 9:32 | comment | added | Colera Su |
Yes. You got 63.
|
|
| Dec 3, 2017 at 9:03 | history | edited | Anders Kaseorg | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
deleted 32 characters in body
|
| Dec 3, 2017 at 9:01 | comment | added | Anders Kaseorg |
@ColeraSu Does it do better if I just change type Cost = u32 to type Cost = u64?
|
|
| Dec 3, 2017 at 8:33 | comment | added | Colera Su |
You've got a pretest score 61, but that's because overflow of u32. Maybe you can change to 64-bit integer type?
|
|
| Dec 3, 2017 at 5:58 | history | edited | Anders Kaseorg | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 52 characters in body
|
| Dec 3, 2017 at 5:39 | history | answered | Anders Kaseorg | CC BY-SA 3.0 |