Timeline for Getting number of binary digits combinations without "forbidden" patterns
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
11 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 14, 2012 at 21:25 | comment | added | Dr. belisarius | Oh well, I wanted to give you the opportunity to tweak the measurements :) | |
| Nov 14, 2012 at 21:17 | comment | added | halirutan | @belisarius No, unless I don't win I never make exact measurements ;-) | |
| Nov 14, 2012 at 12:33 | comment | added | Dr. belisarius | Nice +1. Could you test the speed of both solutions head to head on your machine? | |
| Nov 14, 2012 at 11:04 | comment | added | Mr.Wizard | +1 for doing the legwork. I would have done something similar (but likely ugly) if this were a Project Euler problem. | |
| Nov 14, 2012 at 10:50 | history | edited | halirutan | CC BY-SA 3.0 | added 18 characters in body |
| Nov 14, 2012 at 8:52 | history | edited | halirutan | CC BY-SA 3.0 | added 12 characters in body |
| Nov 14, 2012 at 8:50 | comment | added | halirutan | @LeonidShifrin Thanks. I'm thinking about substituting Subsets by a small code which iterates through all subsets. I'm not sure how much faster (or slower) this will be, but the creating of the Subsets is a bottleneck. Unfortunately Subsets[expr,{k},{j}] is not faster which either means there is no speedup to expect or Subsets is just slow. | |
| Nov 14, 2012 at 8:38 | comment | added | Leonid Shifrin | +1. I got a similar idea but alas had no time to implement and write it up. | |
| Nov 14, 2012 at 6:34 | history | edited | halirutan | CC BY-SA 3.0 | added 44 characters in body |
| Nov 14, 2012 at 4:17 | history | edited | halirutan | CC BY-SA 3.0 | edited body |
| Nov 14, 2012 at 3:54 | history | answered | halirutan | CC BY-SA 3.0 |