in reply to Re (tilly) 1: (Golf) Building a Better Binary Tree
in thread (Golf) Building a Better Binary Tree


A question,

You can eliminate calling $s as a function (and the argument passing) and it will still work for the test cases i've been using. Is there a reason not to do that? That is, is there a reason to use the full function call when passing the function ref will work?

If you pulled that out, you would get:

#23456789012345678901234567890123456789012345
$x=0;$s=shift;$x={$_,[$x,0]}for sort$s @_;%$x

[download]
at 45 characters.

jynx

update: alas, this is a false optimization. Thank you tilly for correcting my eyesight :)

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re (tilly) 3: (Golf) Building a Better Binary Tree
by tilly (Archbishop) on Oct 09, 2001 at 22:27 UTC
    I haven't tested under Perl 5.6, but under 5.005 your code does not work.

    Remember that the comparison function specified depends on the arguments passed to it, and not on $a and $b. Therefore the comparison function is not a valid sort sub and you need to do that transform.

    Try this to see what I mean. 

    print Dumper h(sub {$_[0] <=> $_[1]}, 1..6, -3);

    [download]
    With your code that fails. (BTW your other solution also seems to have used this incorrect optimization.)
[reply]
[d/l]

In Section Meditations