Runaway Robot Puzzle
-
- Posts: 5
- Joined: Sat May 17, 2008 9:38 pm
I havent actually quite finished all the levels just yet - chuggin away around 470 right now - but i think itll make it sometime today. I used a similar solution to gfoot and falcon2424 (preprocess board and then make small compressed boards from various possible instruction lengths). But I have this weird problem - some take about 16 milliseconds not counting download, and most are under a second, but some random ones take upwards of 10-20 mins for no apparent reason. Did anyone else get that or is it some obscure bug in my code?
-
- Posts: 115
- Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 9:47 pm
well, for forums it works, but here doesn't... had to use ultimate solutionAllosentient wrote:Hello,
Replace < with %3C
Replace > with %3E
If there is a way to fix it on your end, that is what will work.
You can find a complete chart here:
http://www.ascii.cl/htmlcodes.htm
Best of luck!
I agree to you: Here are some hints given. But I'd like to discuss alternative solving strategies with you as I had come to level 166 with my algorithm - but it's getting very slow now and having found a solution for the last levels seems to contain some luck...V4hn wrote:remark _for_ the moderators: i think this thread gives away too much information
on the well-scaling algorithms, even when i read it after coding mine...
may someone removes at least some of the information given?
After all it takes a lot of fun out of the coding, if you know exactly what to do..
I tried to upload my solution by HTTP but it does not work. It says that I am an invalid user...
I did everything ok I think.
http://www.hacker.org/runaway/index.php ... >&path=XXX
xxx means my password and XXX is my solution.
What is wrong with that?
I did everything ok I think.
http://www.hacker.org/runaway/index.php ... >&path=XXX
xxx means my password and XXX is my solution.
What is wrong with that?
Really Nice puzzle! Finally solved it
I'm little bit sad of that High scores are ordered by time of solve...
It would be nice to somehow measure time to solve from solving first lvl first time to last one...
I'm so happy!!! I haven't sleeped this night (debug,debug,debug...)
I wonder which puzzle is good to try next... every of them seems to be too hard for me...
Any ideas?
Thank You for hacker.org
I'm little bit sad of that High scores are ordered by time of solve...
It would be nice to somehow measure time to solve from solving first lvl first time to last one...
I'm so happy!!! I haven't sleeped this night (debug,debug,debug...)
I wonder which puzzle is good to try next... every of them seems to be too hard for me...
Any ideas?
Thank You for hacker.org
There are 10 types of people, those who understand ternary, those who think that this joke is about binary and the others.
I think OneOfUs is probably a good one to move onto next, my basis for that is that it's what I'm doing Also it would be pretty hard to gauge peoples solver speeds as the solvers can be so fast, like 0.005s or less, you'd end up gauging people's latencies to the web server more than the efficiency of their solver.
If you check for the game with the most solvers (and think it therefore might be the easiest to solve) then choose OneOfUs. At least I thought so, but OneOfUs is quite hard to solve for me, because the mathematical background is missing I think Mortal Coil and Modulo might also be interesting. After reading the forum, I guess, Crossflip is solvable too, but again with big portions of math. I don't have the lightest clue about Brickolage, Tapeworm or Pusherboy.
I'm currently working on OneOfUs, so it's (hopefully) the best choice
I'm currently working on OneOfUs, so it's (hopefully) the best choice
Thanks. As I looked to OneOfUs I thing it won't be too difficult (I did seminary work(or how it's called in english) about similar theme at Math seminary this year...) See You in HighScore
There are 10 types of people, those who understand ternary, those who think that this joke is about binary and the others.
I don't think it's NP complete, actually. I'm fairly certain my implementation is running in quartic time. The times I'm getting seem to support it - it's at level 202 right now, and the average time to solve something has never drastically increased, as an efficiency worse than polynomial should.laz0r wrote:Damn these NP-complete problems!
On my fairly old computer, it takes about 0.03 seconds to solve one level (around level 200).