# Guidelines

Given two non-negative integers, find the sum of both numbers... to the power of 4.

### Examples

2, 3 -> 97 (2^4 + 3^4 = 97)

14, 6 -> 39712 (14^4 + 6^4 = 39712)

0, 25 -> 390625 (0^4 + 25^4 = 390625)

### Rules

• You will only ever receive two non-negative integers as input (bonus points if you get it to work with negative integer input).
• You can take the input however you would like (arrays, list, two separate arguments, comma-separated string)
• You can either output your answer as a number or a string.
• As this is code golf, the shortest answer in bytes will win.
• You say two positive integers, but one of the test cases contains a 0. Also, there's not many languages that would have trouble with negative integers, given the result is the same as if they were positive.
– Jo King
Feb 19, 2018 at 10:08
• I've downvoted this challenge for the following reason: it is a fairly trivial, yet non-essential (such as Hello, World!) and I doubt that any interesting answers will be produced. Feb 19, 2018 at 12:09
• Downvoted for the same reason as @cairdcoinheringaahing. Feb 19, 2018 at 15:54
• Upvoted because sometimes trivial challenges are fun Feb 19, 2018 at 18:11
• @cairdcoinheringaahing Just because it is trivial, does not mean it is a bad challenge? Take a look at the CP-1610 answer, I would definitely call that interesting. It has produced interesting solutions. Feb 19, 2018 at 19:22

# Regex 🐇m (PCRE2 v10.35 or later), 10 bytes

^(?*x+){4}


Attempt This Online! - PCRE2 v10.40+

Takes its input in comma-delimited unary, as a concatenation of strings of x characters whose lengths represent the numbers, separated by , characters. (Bonus: The number of arguments is variable, not just 2.) Returns its output as the number of ways the regex can match. (The rabbit emoji indicates this output method. It can yield outputs bigger than the input, and is really good at multiplying.)

^ anchors the expression to the beginning of each line, making it process each number in the list exactly once, thanks to the multiline flag. The result of each adds to the total (instead of multiplying the total), since they are independent matches not done in concert.

Non-atomic lookahead, added to PCRE2 in v10.34 as (*napla:...) and given the (?*...) synonym in v10.35, makes calculating $$\n^k\$$, where $$\k\$$ is a constant, very easy in 🐇-regex. (?*x+){4} is equivalent to (?*x+)(?*x+)(?*x+)(?*x+). Each (?*x+) essentially picks a number in $$\[1,n]\$$, cycling through all the values effectively independently of the others, so the number of possible choices that lead to a full match is $$\n^4\$$.

It would not be possible to emulate this kind of solution using lookbehind with recursion to emulate variable-length-lookbehind, because that requires using lookahead nested inside lookbehind, both of which are atomic – so only one possible match would be tried. And even if it were not for that problem, the engine will complain of "nested recursion at the same subject position", which is unavoidable.

# Regex 🐇 (PCRE / Raku:P5), 27 bytes

(|xxx|((||){2}||)xx?)x*x*x+


Try it online! - PCRE1
Try it online! - PCRE2 v10.33 / Attempt This Online! - PCRE2 v10.40+
Try it online! - Raku (Perl 6)

(
# apply once with tail = N
|
xxx          # apply once with tail = N-3
|
((||){2}||)  # apply 3**2+2==11 times...
xx?          # ...with tail = N-1 or N-2
)
x*x*x+           # tail'th pentatope number


Although PCRE and Raku are the only regex engines currently capable of counting this regex's number of possible matches without their source code being patched, this regex itself only uses a POSIX ERE level of functionality, so is in theory universally compatible with all regex engines.

Lacking non-atomic lookahead, the only golf-efficient way I can think of to cause the number of possible matches to be $$\n^k\$$, where $$\k\$$ is a constant, is to decompose $$\n^k\$$ into a sum of $$\n\$$-simplex numbers. $$\4\$$-simplex numbers have the formula $$\S_4(n)=n(n+1)(n+2)(n+3)/24\$$. So what we want is to solve is:

$$n^4=a⋅S_4(n)+b⋅S_4(n-1)+c⋅S_4(n-2)+d⋅S_4(n-3)$$

for $$\a,b,c,d\$$. The general form of this turns out to have the $$\k\$$th Euler's triangle row as its solution. In the case of $$\n^4\$$, this is $$\1,11,11,1\$$.

The 🐇-regex for $$\S_4(n)\$$ is x*x*x+: Try it online!

What we need to do is have it match $$\1\$$ time on $$\n\$$, $$\11\$$ times on $$\n-1\$$, $$\11\$$ times on $$\n-2\$$, and $$\1\$$ time on $$\n-3\$$.

Multiplying the number of possible matches of a subexpression can be done simply by concatenating, for example, (|||) to multiply by $$\4\$$. As a standalone regex returning $$\4(n+1)\$$, this can simply be |||: Try it online! - note that this is $$\4(n+1)\$$ because an empty regex returns $$\n+1\$$ possible matches.

The simplest choice for multiplying by $$\11\$$ would be (||||||||||), but it turns out this can be optimized down to ((||){2}||), as $$\11=3^2+2\$$, where (||){2} is $$\3^2\$$ and each additional | adds $$\1\$$. Larger numbers can be additionally optimized by factorization. Additionally, there's expressions like (|){3,5} for $$\56=2^3+2^4+2^5\$$.

So, ((||){2}||)xx? is the part where it's creating $$\11\$$ possibilities each, ((||){2}||), in which the subsequent expression is evaluated on $$\n-1\$$ or $$\n-2\$$, using xx?.

The first several n-simplex functions are as follows, in 🐇-regex:

$$\S_0(n)\$$: ^ (returns $$\1\$$)
$$\S_1(n)\$$: x (returns $$\n\$$)
$$\S_2(n)\$$: x+ (triangular numbers)
$$\S_3(n)\$$: x*x+ (tetrahedral numbers)
$$\S_4(n)\$$: x*x*x+ (pentatope numbers)
$$\S_5(n)\$$: x(x*){4}
$$\S_6(n)\$$: x(x*){5}

The first several $$\n^k\$$ are as follows:

$$\n^0\$$: Try it online! ^
$$\n^1\$$: Try it online! x
$$\n^2\$$: Try it online! x?x+ (squares)
$$\n^3\$$: Try it online! (|xx|(|||)x)x*x+ (cubes)
$$\n^4\$$: Try it online! (|xxx|((||){2}||)xx?)x*x*x+
$$\n^5\$$: Try it online! x(|x{4}|x((||||){2}|)(|xx)|((|){6}||)xx)(x*){4}
$$\n^6\$$: Try it online! x(|x{5}|x((|){3,5}|)(|xxx)|(|)((||||){2,3}|)xxx?)(x*){5}
$$\n^7\$$: Try it online! x(|x{6}|x(|){3,6}(|x{4})|xx(||)((||||||){2,3}|||||)(xx)?|xxx(|){4}((||||){2,3}|))(x*){6}
$$\n^8\$$: Try it online! x(|x{7}|x((||){5}||||)(|x{5})|xx(||){4}((|){4,5}|||||)(|xxx)|xxx((|){8}((|){2,5}|)|||)x?)(x*){7}

Perl 5 severely undercounts the number of possible matches (Attempt This Online); see below for a workaround. But Raku's Perl 5 compatibility mode (:P5 adverb) fully evaluates every choice path (and not just due to its :exhaustive adverb – it does the same without it).

# Regex 🐇 (Perl / PCRE / Raku:P5), 30 bytes

(|xxx|(()||||||||||)xx?)x*x*x+


Try it online! - Perl v5.28.2 / Attempt This Online! - Perl v5.36+
Try it online! - PCRE1
Try it online! - PCRE2 v10.33 / Attempt This Online! - PCRE2 v10.40+
Try it online! - Raku (Perl 6)

The part in the 27 byte version that is undercounted by Perl is ((||){2}||), the expression that multiplies possibilities by 11.

Perl forces any loop to exit after making a zero-width match (whereas PCRE only does so on loops whose quantifier has no maximum, which I think is more logical), so (||){2} needs to be changed to (||)(||), adding 1 byte.

Perl prunes a group's alternatives down to one if they are all identical, but doesn't do this if even one alternative differs from the others. So (||) needs to be changed to (()||) in both places, adding 4 bytes.

After all that, it becomes ((()||)(()||)||). But that's longer than (()||||||||||), so we use the latter instead, at just 3 bytes longer than ((||){2}||).

# Regex 🐇m (PCRE), 73 69 bytes

Without decomposing a fourth power into pentatope numbers, I'm pretty sure this is the best solution possible (it might golf down a tiny bit more than this, but not much):

^(?=(x*)\1{3}(xx())?(x())?)((?=\1(x*))(x+(|||)|\3(|)|\5).*(?=\7$)){4}  Try it online! - PCRE2 v10.33 / Attempt This Online! - PCRE2 v10.40+ ^ # tail = N = input number (?= (x*)\1{3} # \1 = floor(tail / 4) (()xx)?(()x)? # \3,\5 = {tail % 4} in binary: # \3 set|unset = 2's place digit 1|0 # \5 set|unset = 1's place digit 1|0 ) ( # Manipulate the number of possible matches to be exactly \1 * 4 + \2 == N (?=\1(x*)) # \7 = tail - \1 ( x+(|||) # Add \1 * 4 to the number of possibilities of this iteration | \3(|)|\5 # Add \3*2 + \5 (where set=1 and unset=0) to the number of # possibilities of this iteration ) .*(?=\7$)        # tail = \7, i.e. the next multiple of \1 down from what it
# was when \7 was captured above.
){4}                 # Iterate the above 4 times, such that after finishing, each
# iteration could have been at any one of the N states.


This method does eventually win out against simplex decomposition:

1: x
x

2: x?x+
^(?=(x*)\1(x()|))\2(x+(|)|\3).*(?=\1$)(?4) 3: (|xx|(|||)x)x*x+ ^(?=(x*)\1\1(x())?(x())?)((?=\1(x*))(x+(||)|\3|\5).*(?=\7$)){3}

4: (|xxx|((||){2}||)xx?)x*x*x+
^(?=(x*)\1{3}(xx())?(x())?)((?=\1(x*))(x+(|||)|\3(|)|\5).*(?=\7$)){4} 5: x(|x{4}|x((||||){2}|)(|xx)|((|){6}||)xx)(x*){4} ^(?=(x*)\1{4}(xx())?(x())?(x())?)((?=\1(x*))(x+(||||)|\3(|)|\5|\7).*(?=\9$)){5}

6: x(|x{5}|x((|){3,5}|)(|xxx)|(|)((||||){2,3}|)xxx?)(x*){5}
^(?=(x*)\1{5}(xx())?(xx())?(x())?)((?=\1(x*))(x+(|||||)|\3(|)|\5(|)|\7).*(?=\9$)){6} 7: x(|x{6}|x(|){3,6}(|x{4})|xx(||)((||||||){2,3}|||||)(|xx)|xxx(|){4}((||||){2,3}|))(x*){6} ^(?=(x*)\1{6}(xxx())?(xx())?(x())?)((?=\1(x*))(x+(||||||)|\3(||)|\5(|)|\7).*(?=\9$)){7}

8: x(|x{7}|x((||){5}||||)(|x{5})|xx(||){4}((|){4,5}|||||)(|xxx)|xxx((|){8}((|){2,5}|)|||)x?)(x*){7}
^(?=(x*)\1{7}(x{4}())?(xx())?(x())?)((?=\1(x*))(x+(|){3}|\3(|||)|\5(|)|\7).*(?=\9$)){8} # CP-1610 assembly, 30 DECLEs = 38 bytes Let's try this on a processor lacking a multiply instruction. This code is intended to be run on an Intellivision. CP-1610 instructions are encoded with 10-bit values, known as 'DECLE' s. This subroutine is 30 DECLEs long, starting at$4808 and ending at $4825. Takes input in registers R0 and R3. Saves the result in R2.  ROMW 10 ; use 10-bit ROM ORG$4800         ; map program at address $4800 4800 02B8 000E MVII #14, R0 ; example call 4802 02BB 0006 MVII #6, R3 4804 0004 0148 0008 CALL addX4Y4 4807 0017 DECR PC ; loop forever 4808 0275 addX4Y4 PSHR R5 ; push the return address 4809 0004 0148 001A CALL square ; compute R2 = R0^2 480C 0004 0148 0019 CALL square2 ; compute R2 = R2^2 480F 0272 PSHR R2 ; push this result on the stack 4810 0098 MOVR R3, R0 ; compute R2 = R3^2 4811 0004 0148 001A CALL square 4814 0004 0148 0019 CALL square2 ; compute R2 = R2^2 4817 02F2 ADD@ R6, R2 ; add this result to the intermediate one 4818 02B7 PULR PC ; return 4819 0090 square2 MOVR R2, R0 ; copy R2 to R0 481A 0081 square MOVR R0, R1 ; copy R0 to R1 481B 01D2 CLRR R2 ; initialize R2 = result 481C 0200 0002 B halve ; start by halving R1 481E 00C2 add ADDR R0, R2 ; add R0 to R2 481F 0048 loop SLL R0 ; double R0 4820 0079 halve SARC R1 ; halve R1 4821 0221 0004 BC add ; was the LSB set? 4823 022C 0005 BNEQ loop ; is R1 now equal to zero? 4825 00AF JR R5 ; return  ### Example run Running the above code (with R0 = 14 and R3 = 6) gives: > b 4807 Set breakpoint at$4807
> r
Hit breakpoint at $4807 0900 0000 9B20 0006 01FE 4817 02F1 4807 S-----iq DECR R7 ^^^^  R2 is set to$9B20, which is 39712 in decimal.

# Perl, 12 bytes

Includes +1 for p

Works for 1 or more numbers each given on a separate line on STDIN

(echo 2; echo 3) | perl -pe '$\+=$_**4}{'


# Haskell, 11 bytes

sum.map(^4)


This is a function that takes the parameters as a list.

Try it online!

• Same bytecount: a#b=a^4+b^4 Feb 19, 2018 at 15:02

# ><>, 11 bytes

:*:*$:*:*+n  Try it online! Takes values through the -v flag. Dupe and multipy, dupe and multiply, and repeat with the other value before adding the two together and printing. ## Retina, 9 bytes .+ **** _  Try it online! Input should be linefeed-separated. ### Explanation .+ ****  * is Retina's repetition operator. It has implicit operands $& and _, respectively, so the substitution pattern is short for $&*$&*$&*$&*_. It's also right-associative, if the regex matches a decimal number n, this generates a string of n4 underscores (i.e. a unary representation of the fourth power of n).

_


To sum the two results and convert the sum back to decimal, we simply count the number of underscores in the string.

# Japt, 3 bytes

Takes input as an array of integers; can handle negatives and more than 2 integers at a time. Add N at the beginning to take input as individual integers.

xp4


Try it

## Explanation

p4 raises each element to the power of 4 and x reduces by addition.

# Pyt, 2 bytes

⁴Ʃ


Try it online!

Takes input as a list.

• Knew there would be a language with a built-in for **4, congrats. Feb 20, 2018 at 16:50

# APL (Dyalog Unicode), 5 bytesSBCS

Anonymous tacit prefix function. Takes a list as argument. The list may have any length and contain any numbers, even complex ones.

+.*∘4


Try it online!

+.* is a variant on matrix product, +.× as follows: a b+.×c d is (a×c)+(b×d) and a b+.×c is (a×c)+(b×c). So a b+.*c is (a*c)+(b*c). * is power.

∘4 curry four as right argument. This results in a monadic function (a*4)+(b*4).

# J, 7 6 bytes

-1 byte thanks to Adám

1#.^&4


Try it online!

Works for lists with arbitrary length

^&4 - each item of the list to the 4-th power

1#. - sum of all 4-th powers by base-1 conversion

Try it online!

# J, 7 bytes

+/ .^4:


This is a variant of the matrix product, analogue of Adám's APL solution

Try it online!

• 6 bytes: 1#.^&4
Feb 19, 2018 at 10:34
• @Adám Thanks, I forgot to try to add up the numbers by base-1 conversion. Feb 19, 2018 at 11:09

# Python 3, 20 bytes

lambda x,y:x**4+y**4

• You can remove the assignment to f as this isn't a recursive function. Feb 19, 2018 at 11:56
• @Shaggy Maybe I'm confused but how else would my answer take any input? Wouldn't I then be defining something that is essentially 'lost' right after being interpreted? It's not like I can feed input in via args, for example. Or it is normal in codegolf that those bytes 'f=' are not counted? Feb 19, 2018 at 12:27
• What I meant was: you don't need to include it in your byte count. Anonymous functions/lambdas are valid. Feb 19, 2018 at 13:00

# MATL, 3 bytes

K^s


Try it online!

This can handle more than two input values, as well as negative inputs.

### Explanation:

Fasten your seat belts, this might blow your mind!

       % Implicit input
K      % Push literal 4
^     % Raise each element of the input vector to the 4th power
s    % Sum


Also works:

4^s    % Push 4 and raise input to it, then sum
UUs    % Square input twice, then sum


# JavaScript (ES7), 15 bytes

Does exactly what it says on the tin.

a=>b=>a**4+b**4


### Test cases

let f =

a=>b=>a**4+b**4

console.log(f(2)(3))
console.log(f(14)(6))
console.log(f(0)(25))

• Ah, nuts! Feb 19, 2018 at 10:03

# 05AB1E, 3 bytes

4mO


Try it online!

Explanation

4m    # raise each to the power of 4
O   # sum


# Julia, 11 bytes

a$b=a^4+b^4  Try it online! # Julia, 12 bytes !a=sum(a.^4)  Try it online! # Excel, 10 bytes =A1^4+B1^4  Nothing to see here. # C (gcc), 26 bytes f(a,b){a=a*a*a*a+b*b*b*b;}  Try it online! ## C, C++ => 29 bytes -1 byte thanks to Jonathan Frech #define Q(a,b)a*a*a*a+b*b*b*b  Test cases : #include <stdio.h> int main() { printf("Q(%d,%d) = %d\n", 2, 3, Q(2, 3)); printf("Q(%d,%d) = %d\n", 14, 6, Q(14, 6)); printf("Q(%d,%d) = %d\n", 0, 25, Q(0, 25)); }  • Could you not drop the space in ) a? Feb 19, 2018 at 11:07 # Jelly, 3 bytes *4S  Try it online! # Triangularity, 31 bytes ...)... ..IEM.. .)4s^}. u......  Try it online! # C (gcc), 0 + 24 bytes Compile this code main(){ printf("%d\n",x(2,3)); printf("%d\n",x(14,6)); printf("%d\n",x(0,25)); }  With this flag: -D=x(a,b)a*a*a*a+b*b*b*b  # R, 16 bytes pryr::f(x^4+y^4)  Try it online! ## Ruby, 16 bytes ->a,b{a**4+b**4}  Try It Online! # Java 8, 21 bytes a->b->a*a*a*a+b*b*b*b  Try it online. # Perl 6, 9 bytes *⁴+*⁴  Try it online! • @EsolangingFruit The problem is that along with * WhateverCode lambdas there are also ** HyperWhatever lambdas; so it would have to be written as * **4+* **4, or else it would would be seen as ** *4+** *4 which doesn't work. ((**⁴)(2,3) results in (16,18)) Feb 19, 2018 at 17:59 • @BradGilbertb2gills I guess that makes sense. Why am I surprised Perl supports Unicode superscript exponents? Feb 20, 2018 at 1:01 # Pyth, 5 sm^d4   ^d4 # lambda to take 4th power Q # implicit input m # map lambda over input s # sum  # Attache, 8 bytes Sum@^&4  Try it online! Takes input as a pair of integers. ## Explanation This is a composition of two functions: • Sum • ^&4 The first executed is ^&4, which is equivalent to: ^&4 RBond[^, 4] RBond[{_1 ^ _2}, 4] {_1 ^ 4}  That is, a function that raises its argument to the fourth power. This vectorizes over the input array. Then, Sum takes the sum of these elements. ## Alternative approaches Sum@^&4@V ?? 11 bytes, input is two arguments {Sum[_^4]} ?? 11 bytes, input is array {_^4+_2^4} ?? 11 bytes, input is two arguments  # Pyramid Scheme, 220 bytes  ^ / \ / \ / + \ / \ ^---------^ /^\ /^\ ^---^ ^---^ /#\ /4\ /#\ /4\ ^--- --- ^--- --- /l\ /l\ /ine\ /ine\ ----- -----  Try it online! line pyramids obtain a line from STDIN, # pyramids cast their arguments into numbers, ^ pyramids perform exponentiation, and the + pyramid adds two things together. # Minkolang 0.15, 10 bytes $n4;r4;+N.


Try it here.

## Explanation

$n4;r4;+N.$n           take all input as numbers     [a, b]
4;         raise to the fourth           [a, b^4]
r        reverse stack                 [b^4, a]
4;      raise to the fourth           [b^4, a^4]
+     add                           [b^4 + a^4]
N    output                        []
.   terminate


# D, 25 bytes

(int x,int y)=>x^^4+y^^4;


Try it online!

A simple lambda that performs exponentiation on each of its arguments, with ^^ being the exponentiation operator.