53 lines
1.8 KiB
Text
53 lines
1.8 KiB
Text
|
Day 9 Notes
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
+--------+
|
||
|
|
| Part 1 |
|
||
|
|
+--------+
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
$ elixir day9part1.exs
|
||
|
|
18272118
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Thoughts:
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Searching inside a sliding window.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Tricky to write efficiently in an immutable language.
|
||
|
|
I knew what I wanted to do, but working out how to write that took a lot of thought.
|
||
|
|
The solution completes in just over 1ms, so I'm pretty happy with it.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Every time the window slides, I decided to sort it, which means I could take the following shortcuts:
|
||
|
|
* When selecting the first number in the pair, stop early if added to the first number in the preamble it's
|
||
|
|
greater than the target, because we know the rest of the numbers are also too large.
|
||
|
|
* Similarly can do the same when checking for the second number in the pair.
|
||
|
|
* Avoids comparing pairs we already compared.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
+--------+
|
||
|
|
| Part 2 |
|
||
|
|
+--------+
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
$ elixir day9part2.exs
|
||
|
|
2186361
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Thoughts:
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Initially hard-coded the answer from part 1, but then decided to re-use part one and pass it as an
|
||
|
|
input to keep the solution fully dynamic.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Similar to part 1, but now we have to check an unknown number of adjacent items. Again stop checking each
|
||
|
|
group as soon as the sum is too big, and move to the next group.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
This answer also completes in about a millisecond (not including part 1).
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
P.S. I accidentally copied part 1 over part 2 after solving this, and had to write the solution again 🤦🏼♂️
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
+------------------+
|
||
|
|
| Overall Thoughts |
|
||
|
|
+------------------+
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
The most challenging thing here was working out how to write it in an immutable, recursive way cleanly.
|
||
|
|
I was considering using the :array module, but I think I managed to get everything working nicely with
|
||
|
|
lists without the need to do lots of expensive list-indexing. Pretty sure both answers are O(nlogn).
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Probably will tidy up this more later, especailly Part 1, but done for now.
|