this post was submitted on 19 Dec 2024
7 points (76.9% liked)
Advent Of Code
981 readers
21 users here now
An unofficial home for the advent of code community on programming.dev!
Advent of Code is an annual Advent calendar of small programming puzzles for a variety of skill sets and skill levels that can be solved in any programming language you like.
AoC 2024
Solution Threads
M | T | W | T | F | S | S |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | ||||||
2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 |
9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 |
16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 |
23 | 24 | 25 |
Rules/Guidelines
- Follow the programming.dev instance rules
- Keep all content related to advent of code in some way
- If what youre posting relates to a day, put in brackets the year and then day number in front of the post title (e.g. [2024 Day 10])
- When an event is running, keep solutions in the solution megathread to avoid the community getting spammed with posts
Relevant Communities
Relevant Links
Credits
Icon base by Lorc under CC BY 3.0 with modifications to add a gradient
console.log('Hello World')
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Rust
First part is solved by making a regex of the available towels, like
^(r|wr|bg|bwu|rb|gb|br)*$
for the example. If a design matches it, then it can be made. This didn't work for the second part, which is done using recursion and memoization instead. Again, it was quite surprising to see such a high solution number. 32 bits were not enough (thanks, debug mode overflow detection).Solution
Also on github
How fast was the regex approach?
About 3ms. A manual implementation might be a bit faster, but not by much. The regex crate is quite optimized for pretty much these problems.
Wow, that is very fast, nice. I was happy with 120ms, seems I'm leaving a lot of performance on the table.
Edit: Regex cut my total time in half, but I am measuring the whole execution, still a massive improvement.
The 3ms are for part 1 only, part 2 takes around 27ms. But I see that our approaches there are very similar. One difference that might make an impact is that you copy the substrings for inserting into the hashmap into
String
s.Removing the string copy with the length->count array from @sjmulder saved me 20ms, so not super significant. I'll have to play the the profiler and see what I am doing wrong.
I think your approach looks a lot more Rust-like, which I like. Part 1 in 4 lines is very nice.