Skip to main content

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

Required fields*

9
  • \$\begingroup\$ @Dennis You probably want to start a poll to change it. \$\endgroup\$ Commented Jun 1, 2015 at 1:37
  • \$\begingroup\$ @Dennis Not sure increasing the size would have helped much. While it increases the computation time substantially, it also produces about 100 times more output. Relatively speaking, the amount of output is actually larger. \$\endgroup\$ Commented Jun 1, 2015 at 2:34
  • \$\begingroup\$ 1st version Execution: 0.286 s Compilation: 0.053 s Sum: 0.339 s 2nd version Execution: 0.002 s Compilation: 0.061 s Sum: 0.063 s (What did just happen here?) \$\endgroup\$ Commented Jun 2, 2015 at 4:29
  • \$\begingroup\$ @Dennis It used another algorithm in O(m*n*2^n) if the flag is set. \$\endgroup\$ Commented Jun 2, 2015 at 4:38
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ Execution: 190 ms Compilation: 68 ms Sum: 258 ms (-O1 seems to be the sweet spot. I've tried all optimization levels.) \$\endgroup\$ Commented Jun 2, 2015 at 15:03