this post was submitted on 02 Dec 2023
146 points (95.6% 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

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
 
top 20 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] silvanocerza@lemmy.world 20 points 11 months ago (2 children)

I was surprised seeing ton of people going for the replace approach. It didn't even cross my mind to edit the string, I went straight for regex for part 1 and it was easy enough to adapt it for part 2.

[–] UndercoverUlrikHD@programming.dev 4 points 11 months ago

On the surface level it makes sense since you already wrote the code to extract the numbers based on digits, which will be in the back of your mind. Once you have some time think about though, it's obvious it's better to just directly find the first and last "digit" without changing the string.

[–] stifle867@programming.dev 1 points 11 months ago

I did this exact thing and hit the point where it didn't work. I appreciated that the problem broke my code because it made me arrive at a better solution.

[–] dns@aussie.zone 10 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (4 children)

My solution was worse than most: replace one -> one1one You are only going to do the replace all for each number and if the "e" is also in eight it is still there for the next set of replace.

A better quick and dirty solution from Mastodon was to just add the common character first: twone -> twoone

[–] abbadon420@lemm.ee 4 points 11 months ago (1 children)

That's an esthetic abomination, but very clever

[–] AnarchistArtificer@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I have a friend who says that "whatever works is elegant" and solutions like OP's is why I simultaneously love and hate that phrase.

[–] sus@programming.dev 2 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Behold, elegance:

digits = { "one": [1,2], "two": [2,2], "three": [3,4], "four": [4,3], "five": [5,3], "six": [6,2], "seven": [7,4], "eight": [8,4], "nine": [9,3], "1": [1,1], "2": [2,1], "3": [3,1], "4": [4,1], "5": [5,1], "6": [6,1], "7": [7,1], "8": [8,1], "9": [9,1] }

and what comes afterwards is even more elegant, for it works!

[–] Lmaydev@programming.dev 4 points 11 months ago

I just check every substring haha

[–] Turun@feddit.de 2 points 11 months ago

The problem is that 21 is not the only problematic combination.

[–] damium@programming.dev 1 points 11 months ago

You can also use o1e as there are never more than a single shared character. It also doesn't change the string size so it can be done in place. Still an ugly hack of a solution.

[–] SigmarStern@discuss.tchncs.de 8 points 11 months ago (2 children)

I have hacked together the ugliest of solutions and got my two stars but at what price?

[–] superfes@lemmy.world 11 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I just reverse the string and reverse the number names >_>

Cheater?

Maybe...

[–] SigmarStern@discuss.tchncs.de 3 points 11 months ago

That's clever. Way more than my Regex abomination

[–] cm0002@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago
[–] Bumblefumble@lemm.ee 2 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Just saw this community and it looks cool even though I'm probably not capable of solving most of the puzzles. But having looked through the community, I can only really find solution threads. Where are the actual puzzles posted so I can give it a go?

[–] dns@aussie.zone 8 points 11 months ago (1 children)

https://adventofcode.com/2023 The first question is public, login to get your test data and submit your answers and unlock part 2.

[–] grue@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago (2 children)

But I don't wanna log in, though. I don't care about the leaderboards or anything like that, and call me old fashioned, but I don't like giving my identity to every little website I visit as a matter of general principles.

[–] JPAKx4@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 11 months ago

There is an anon mode, but it does want you to log in to keep track of progress, either through Google, GitHub etc. I do wish there was a true logless mode but I think it's cool enough for me to just want to do

[–] drugo@sh.itjust.works 2 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Like they don't track you just by visiting? Also, no one said you need to "give them your identity". Make up one.

[–] Shareni@programming.dev 1 points 11 months ago

What, you didn't give them your social security number, passport, dental records, and three generations of birth certificates?