Timeline for Put a list in order
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
21 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 1, 2014 at 0:13 | comment | added | Scott Leadley | @Ypnypn I added some more test cases to your puzzle. You may want to review the answers to see if they fit your idea of what the question is. | |
| S Aug 31, 2014 at 15:14 | history | suggested | Scott Leadley | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
adding test cases to question, as per the consensus in Meta "discussion"
|
| Aug 31, 2014 at 14:27 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| S Aug 31, 2014 at 15:14 | |||||
| Aug 25, 2014 at 2:04 | answer | added | Scott Leadley | timeline score: 0 | |
| Aug 21, 2014 at 16:12 | answer | added | Bizangles | timeline score: 2 | |
| Aug 21, 2014 at 12:59 | comment | added | Ypnypn | @Ray: You need to first select a string before any operations. | |
| Aug 20, 2014 at 17:53 | comment | added | Ray |
For case 4 abc def cd ccc, isn't R abc F alphabetically smaller than abc L R? The ascii code of upper letters are smaller.
|
|
| Aug 20, 2014 at 12:47 | history | edited | Ypnypn | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 15 characters in body
|
| Aug 20, 2014 at 2:33 | comment | added | HostileFork says dont trust SE | I will point out that if you want to guarantee a minimal set of operations, you are on computationally intractable ground...*even knowing the minimal number of comparisons* required for a sort is only known up to 15 items at present. See "Psychic Sorting Algorithms". | |
| Aug 19, 2014 at 20:28 | comment | added | Scott Leadley | Two comments: (1) only the third example [IN 4 abc def cd ccc] meets the input criteria of 2-99 letters/string (2) the first example [IN 2 aa b] appears to be already sorted, unless sorting is by length first, in which case the third example is wrong. | |
| Aug 19, 2014 at 20:07 | comment | added | Claudiu | I was hoping for more sophisticated examples. I'm having trouble figuring out how to provably find the shortest solution without a breadth-first search over all possibilities, which quickly gets ridiculous | |
| Aug 19, 2014 at 19:59 | comment | added | Ypnypn | @Claudiu There will be no duplicates. That's correct. | |
| Aug 19, 2014 at 19:58 | comment | added | Ypnypn | @Claudiu Okay; done. I think these demonstrate all of the rules. | |
| Aug 19, 2014 at 19:55 | history | edited | Ypnypn | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
examples
|
| Aug 19, 2014 at 19:08 | comment | added | Doorknob |
Just for fun, Vim commands for all of these actions: U=ddkP, D=ddp, F=ddggP, L=ddGp, R=:g/^/m0. :P
|
|
| Aug 19, 2014 at 17:50 | comment | added | Claudiu | Will the input have duplicate entries? Also it's true that moving item x up is the same as moving item x-1 down right? | |
| Aug 19, 2014 at 16:33 | comment | added | Claudiu | Could you provide some sample inputs with the correct outputs? | |
| Aug 19, 2014 at 16:29 | comment | added | Ypnypn | @AndoDaan Fixed. Your score is the size of your program. The rules listed above are to figure out which solution must be printed by the program. | |
| Aug 19, 2014 at 16:26 | history | edited | Ypnypn | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 128 characters in body
|
| Aug 19, 2014 at 16:24 | comment | added | Peter Taylor |
Your example appears to contradict the spec on at least two counts: it has strings which aren't 2-99 lower-case English letters, and it has a command A which doesn't exist.
|
|
| Aug 19, 2014 at 16:14 | history | asked | Ypnypn | CC BY-SA 3.0 |