this post was submitted on 16 Dec 2023
15 points (100.0% liked)
Advent Of Code
761 readers
1 users here now
An unofficial home for the advent of code community on programming.dev!
Advent of Code is an annual Advent calendar of small programming puzzles for a variety of skill sets and skill levels that can be solved in any programming language you like.
AoC 2023
Solution Threads
| M | T | W | T | F | S | S |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | ||||
| 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 |
| 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 |
| 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 |
| 25 |
Rules/Guidelines
- Follow the programming.dev instance rules
- Keep all content related to advent of code in some way
- If what youre posting relates to a day, put in brackets the year and then day number in front of the post title (e.g. [2023 Day 10])
- When an event is running, keep solutions in the solution megathread to avoid the community getting spammed with posts
Relevant Communities
Relevant Links
Credits
Icon base by Lorc under CC BY 3.0 with modifications to add a gradient
console.log('Hello World')
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Rust
I simply check each starting position individually for Part 2, I don't know if there are more clever solutions. Initially that approach ran in 180ms which is a lot more than any of the previous puzzles needed, so I tried if I could optimize it.
Initially I was using two hash sets, one for counting unique energized fields, and one for detecting cycles which also included the direction in the hash. Going from the default rust hasher to FxHash sped it up to 100ms. Seeing that, I thought that this point could be further improved upon, and ended up replacing both hash sets with boolean arrays, since their size is neatly bounded by the input field size. Now it runs in merely 30ms, meaning a 6x speedup just by getting rid of the hashing.