Re^4: OT: Computer Science for (a couple steps up from) Dummies (updated)

Common sense is the most fairly distributed thing in the world, for each one thinks he is so well-endowed with it that even those who are hardest to satisfy in all other matters are not in the habit of desiring more of it than they already have.
--- René Descartes

;-P

Anyway, we already agreed that a diploma in CS doesn't make you a scientist nor a programmer.

You might wanna have a look at the ways me and others handled this problem:

Re: Google Code Jam 2019 Round 1A Problem 1: Pylons

While I produced a formal proof for all possible solution (using techniques I learned at university), others "solved" it much quicker with a a mix of brute force and random generators.

It really depends, what you need to invest for which outcome.

BTW: I learned programing with 14, long before entering university.

update

other example: Re: Check randomly generated numbers have not been used before

This particular poster ignored the "Birthday paradox",

I produced the exact formula I learned at school,
others tried it out to prove him wrong.

again depends what you need.

Cheers Rolf
_{(addicted to the Perl Programming Language :)

Wikisyntax for the Monastery
FootballPerl is like chess, only without the dice}

Comment on Re^4: OT: Computer Science for (a couple steps up from) Dummies (updated)

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^5: OT: Computer Science for (a couple steps up from) Dummies (updated) by bliako (Abbot) on May 29, 2019 at 08:57 UTC
While I produced a formal proof for all possible solution (using techniques I learned at university), others "solved" it much quicker with a a mix of brute force and random generators. Google or whoever set the challenge made sure that "calculators are allowed", for a reason I suppose. That's my fixation with Optimisation as a social goal (Re: Curious about Perl's strengths in 2018). I am also a self-taught programmer. Never had any formal training bar some Pascal. And at the same age as you (14), I got into my first "birthday paradox" gaffe by trying to fit 3**13 combinations of football matches into my ZX-Spectrum's 48K(bytes), too cocky by my previous success in creating an iterator for listing them. "Out of Memory" it said and I thought I reached the Edge of the Universe. But it was a lesson since. I am not sure what's best: to make the mistakes as early or as late in life. Next time I am around I will make them as late and document the outcome. But I am not sure 42 will still be the answer...	[reply]

Replies are listed 'Best First'.

Re^5: OT: Computer Science for (a couple steps up from) Dummies (updated)
by bliako (Abbot) on May 29, 2019 at 08:57 UTC

While I produced a formal proof for all possible solution (using techniques I learned at university), others "solved" it much quicker with a a mix of brute force and random generators.

Google or whoever set the challenge made sure that "calculators are allowed", for a reason I suppose. That's my fixation with Optimisation as a social goal (Re: Curious about Perl's strengths in 2018).

I am also a self-taught programmer. Never had any formal training bar some Pascal. And at the same age as you (14), I got into my first "birthday paradox" gaffe by trying to fit 3**13 combinations of football matches into my ZX-Spectrum's 48K(bytes), too cocky by my previous success in creating an iterator for listing them. "Out of Memory" it said and I thought I reached the Edge of the Universe. But it was a lesson since.

I am not sure what's best: to make the mistakes as early or as late in life. Next time I am around I will make them as late and document the outcome. But I am not sure 42 will still be the answer...

[reply]