Can I let the program crash due to a dimension error to save space?
Or will this affect my time?
Or is this not allowed?
Or do I have too many questions?
Here is an example of an input and output matrix where all the scenarios that have been asked about are present.



Here, there are dead ends, there are diagonals, the entrance and exit are at the right place, etc. You can see that the solution doesn't go through corners, it doesn't backtrack, and it solves the maze.
I'm done:



DISCLAIMER
This was a joke and is not to be taken as advice.
_iPhoenix_ wrote:
I'm done:



DISCLAIMER
This was a joke and is not to be taken as advice.


oooh... Thinking outside the box... I like that.
Please tell me we can at least use window variables.
Hmm...

Code:
1111111111 -> 01111111111 -> 01111111111
0000000101    00000000101    22000000101
1100100101    01100100101    21100100101
1101100001    01101100001    21101100001
1001000101    01001000101    21001000101
1010011001    01010011001    21010011001
1111000001    01111000001    21111000001
1000111011    01000111011    21000111011
0010000001    00010000001    22010000001
1111111111    01111111111    01111111111

Solved!
_iPhoenix_ wrote:
Can I let the program crash due to a dimension error to save space?
Or will this affect my time?
Or is this not allowed?
Or do I have too many questions?

That would definitely negatively affect your score 😂😂😂
_iPhoenix_ wrote:
Can I let the program crash due to a dimension error to save space?
Or will this affect my time?
Or is this not allowed?
Or do I have too many questions?

The program has to solve the maze, if it does not, then it is automatically disqualified. If the dim error happens, but the maze is solved, then I guess your speed and size scores won't be negatively affected, but you may lose points for elegance.
commandblockguy wrote:
Hmm...

Code:
1111111111 -> 01111111111 -> 01111111111
0000000101    00000000101    22000000101
1100100101    01100100101    21100100101
1101100001    01101100001    21101100001
1001000101    01001000101    21001000101
1010011001    01010011001    21010011001
1111000001    01111000001    21111000001
1000111011    01000111011    21000111011
0010000001    00010000001    22010000001
1111111111    01111111111    01111111111

Solved!

that's not how a maze works Laughing
I must reluctantly back out of this challenge, as real life things happened.

I hope to be able to do CC20, whenever that ends up being.

I can still post here 'n' stuff, I just do not have the time and will not have the energy to work on my submission.

Good luck, everyone!
_iPhoenix_ wrote:
I must reluctantly back out of this challenge, as real life things happened.

I hope to be able to do CC20, whenever that ends up being.

I can still post here 'n' stuff, I just do not have the time and will not have the energy to work on my submission.

Good luck, everyone!


Oh man, you are just going to let Mateo sweep the competition..?

No matter, I will push forward for you!
oldmud0 wrote:
_iPhoenix_ wrote:
I must reluctantly back out of this challenge, as real life things happened.

I hope to be able to do CC20, whenever that ends up being.

I can still post here 'n' stuff, I just do not have the time and will not have the energy to work on my submission.

Good luck, everyone!


Oh man, you are just going to let Mateo sweep the competition..?

No matter, I will push forward for you!


First off, Mateo would STILL sweep the competition if I were in it, (no offense to everyone else) and Secondly, Mateo is in the contest now? He said he was not going to enter...
_iPhoenix_ wrote:
Secondly, Mateo is in the contest now? He said he was not going to enter...

Jacobly supposedly has 96 bytes... I call Hax. But yeah I don't know I guess I'll see how long I want to think about it Razz I usually get distracted with other things anyway, so I probably will just call it good enough for now.
The smallest I seem to be able to get is 96 94 90 86 bytes of code. There are pathological inputs that take forever, but I'm not sure if I'm expected to handle them (which would certainly cost a lot of bytes), and normal maze-like things take < 3 seconds.

Edit: Looks like fixing the pathological cases costs either 24 12 10 bytes or not requiring the output to contain 0 in parts that aren't on the path (which for the record, it doesn't actually say anywhere if parts of the matrix not on the path must contain the original numbers, or just not be 2).
It seems fair to me, that in the output the walls must stay the same, just 1's, but that the 0's can be overwritten to anything except 1 or 2. Only if mr womp womp and Pieman agree of course Razz
I have an evil genius plan... I've been thinking all week and I currently have 101 bytes minimum. Watch out Jacobly!
Here's the test input Mateo made:
⎡1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1⎤
⎢0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1⎥
⎢1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1⎥
⎢1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1⎥
⎢1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1⎥
⎢1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1⎥
⎢1 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 1⎥
⎢1 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 1⎥
⎢0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 1⎥
⎣1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1⎦


Here are the pathological inputs I came up with:
⎡1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1⎤
⎢0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1⎥
⎢1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1⎥
⎢1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1⎥
⎢1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1⎥
⎢1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1⎥
⎢1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1⎥
⎢1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1⎥
⎢0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1⎥
⎣1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1⎦


⎡1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1⎤
⎢0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1⎥
⎢1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1⎥
⎢1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1⎥
⎢1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1⎥
⎢1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1⎥
⎢1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1⎥
⎢1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1⎥
⎢0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1⎥
⎣1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1⎦
jacobly wrote:
Here's the test input Mateo made:
⎡1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1⎤
⎢0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1⎥
⎢1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1⎥
⎢1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1⎥
⎢1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1⎥
⎢1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1⎥
⎢1 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 1⎥
⎢1 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 1⎥
⎢0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 1⎥
⎣1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1⎦


<snip>


How long did it take?
_iPhoenix_ wrote:
jacobly wrote:
Here's the test input Mateo made:
⎡1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1⎤
⎢0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1⎥
⎢1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1⎥
⎢1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1⎥
⎢1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1⎥
⎢1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1⎥
⎢1 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 1⎥
⎢1 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 1⎥
⎢0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 1⎥
⎣1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1⎦


<snip>


How long did it take?


That one takes my program ~2 seconds. The other two would take hundreds of years with my old program, but < 5 seconds with my new one. Razz

Edit: I forgot, I can technically do it in 80 bytes.
PT_ wrote:
It seems fair to me, that in the output the walls must stay the same, just 1's, but that the 0's can be overwritten to anything except 1 or 2. Only if mr womp womp and Pieman agree of course Razz

Seems reasonable Smile i agree with this Razz
80 bytes? Bless me with your wisdom, o gods of programming.

I think I'll try my hand at this, but I won't 'officially' submit it as an entry. My main reason is that I don't have a Steam account, nor do I know anyone who does, so the gift cards would be useless to me.

Anyway, I'll post a code I'm happy with after the contest.
  
Register to Join the Conversation
Have your own thoughts to add to this or any other topic? Want to ask a question, offer a suggestion, share your own programs and projects, upload a file to the file archives, get help with calculator and computer programming, or simply chat with like-minded coders and tech and calculator enthusiasts via the site-wide AJAX SAX widget? Registration for a free Cemetech account only takes a minute.

» Go to Registration page
Page 4 of 6
» All times are GMT - 5 Hours
 
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

 

Advertisement