Really nice kata. I was going to suggest a potential sequel for writing a proper transpiler, but seems like many people already did that for this kata!
I would say easier 4 or harder 5, yeah.
kata is approvable, 4 kyu seems right?
Let's stick with printable characters. I updated the description.
Currently, random tests use char code 32 - 126. So, I don't think this needs to be handled.
32 - 126
Leaving author to resolve this, since author might have a change of mind later.
Does print_string need to be able to handle \x00?
print_string
\x00
Fixed
Its not, thanks
Right, I did not have performance in mind. Made the tests smaller.
Is mem[12] correct in the description of Addition?
mem[12]
0: -2, 9, 3, ; mem[9] -= mem[-2], go to 3 (now mem[9] = -A) 3: 9, -3, 6, ; mem[-3] -= mem[9], go to 6 (now mem[12] = -(A+B))
I agree, multiplication should also be possible well below 1 second.
There are fixed tests with large numbers (up to ~10^6). IMHO 10^4 is sufficient.
The other tasks are faster (my times: multiplication: 2740ms, division: 150ms, print: 10ms, copy: 670ms)
Error pane crashes with out of memory on error. You are printing these larger arrays, there is no need to.
Are there performance constraints? I just implemented multiplication, and all tests (fixed/random) together, already take me about 5 seconds.
Fixed, thanks! :)
Loading collection data...
Really nice kata. I was going to suggest a potential sequel for writing a proper transpiler, but seems like many people already did that for this kata!
I would say easier 4 or harder 5, yeah.
kata is approvable, 4 kyu seems right?
Let's stick with printable characters. I updated the description.
Currently, random tests use char code
32 - 126
. So, I don't think this needs to be handled.Leaving author to resolve this, since author might have a change of mind later.
Does
print_string
need to be able to handle\x00
?Fixed
Its not, thanks
Right, I did not have performance in mind. Made the tests smaller.
Is
mem[12]
correct in the description of Addition?I agree, multiplication should also be possible well below 1 second.
There are fixed tests with large numbers (up to ~10^6). IMHO 10^4 is sufficient.
The other tasks are faster (my times: multiplication: 2740ms, division: 150ms, print: 10ms, copy: 670ms)
Error pane crashes with out of memory on error. You are printing these larger arrays, there is no need to.
Are there performance constraints? I just implemented multiplication, and all tests (fixed/random) together, already take me about 5 seconds.
Fixed, thanks! :)
Loading more items...