Good question. I am struggling also with the node check.

up!

I'm not planning on a Python translation.

If your existing Python solution isn't easily translatable into C, then it's probably a lot more complicated than it needs to be. Instead of just re-implementing the same algorithm, it might pay to look for a simpler approach.

oh, I actually thought that was the complete name... chinesedfan didn't make it clear that there was a looooong part after that part, so in the end, it seems... "good" (rather, "not so bad").

@ALowVerus: I'm not up to date about propenanoyloxy or propenoyloxy. It's the last one that is good, right?

damn it, this name is just totally wrong... :(

15-[1,2,2-triamino]propenanoyloxy

According to test descriptions, 3 amino [NH2, here] at 1,2,3, positions must be wrong.

And it looks strange to me as it contains both en and an. Maybe the correct string should be 15-[1,2,3-triamino]propenoyloxy.

But it still violates bond validity. See the first C of the R.

       O
      ||
C15-O-C=C-C

I see it now, 100 random tests :)

I know this feeling bro :)
Do you know how many 120x120 tests are out there?

My current solution passes around 40-60. I want to know whether I should look for better algorithm or just optimize it?

Thanks!

Am I misunderstanding this? The pattern looks like "If you see a lone number available in a slot, duplicate it appropriately, but if there is nothing there, add 0s", yet somehow your algo wants 3s here.

don;t add zeros, add provided growing_value (which is 3 in this case)

The solution format for zero matrices is the same as for other systems.

Consider the following system:

0 * x1 = 0

One possible solution is SOL = (100) + q1 * (100).

I fixed one more grammar error (a typo).