in reply to Re^2: Spoiled by Perl
in thread Spoiled by Perl

The twenty years of waiting "paid off".
Yes. Indeed it has. Check out this Raku code of mine which is a solution for this years day 14. Any experienced programmer should be able to make sense of, and mostly understand it after spending 2 hours with the docs. I doubt the same is true for any perl implementation of similar brevity.
my ( \o, \r ) = .head.comb.List, .tail.comb( /\w/ ).map( -> $a, $b, $c { "$a$b" => [ "$a$c", "$c$b" + ] } ).Hash with cache $*IN.slurp.split: "\n\n"; sub day14( \n ) { my %d = o.rotor( 2 => -1 )».join.Bag; %d = [(+)] %d.map({ r.{.key} »=>» .value }) for ^n; .Bag.values.minmax.elems - 1 with ( o.tail => 1, |%d ).map: { .key.comb[0] => .value }; } say day14 10|40;


holli

You can lead your users to water, but alas, you cannot drown them.

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^4: Spoiled by Perl
by Jenda (Abbot) on Feb 24, 2022 at 21:11 UTC

    Indeed it has, if the task was to destroy Perl.

    Also ... in an attempt to improve Perl's reputation of write-only line-noise language we ended up with this. Something somewhere along the way went terribly wrong. What makes you think an experienced programmer would want to waste two hours of his time with the docs? A "cute" infantile butterfly?

    Jenda
    1984 was supposed to be a warning,
    not a manual!