advent_of_code VS advent-of-code

Here's the relevant extract from my (recursive) solution. Full code on GitHub.

Like others, I used lcm. Here's an extract of the solution, omitting parsing and main(). Full solution on GitHub.

Solutions to parts 1 and 2 nearly identical and pretty much worked first time. Nothing clever here. This was far simpler than I thought it would be. I probably spent most time trying to think of a mathematical way of getting all points between p1 and p2. In the end, I just constructed two ranges. Full code here.

Full code on github.

The core of my solution below using numpy (because I'm learning it!). See github for full code.

Python 3 solution using numpy. I got held up because I assume (but know better) that numpy arrays are [x,y] instead of [row, col], which is [y,x].

Below is the new solution, which works for part 1 and 2. The full code is on GitHub.

These are the key functions. The whole code is on GitHub

Part 2 (extract shown below) was a matter of starting with the low points found in part 1 then recursively looking around for relevant points. Full code on GitHub

Code is on GitHub.

[LANGUAGE: Python 3] 153/75 Raw solution

One could instead count |F7 (that's what I do in my refactored solution), but counting all the bends would miscount the vertical segments (FJ would end up canceling itself out).

That sounds like what I suggested here, actually. I don't have anything in my library with quite the right API yet, but I already have most of what you describe coded out. (It looks like I whipped it up for 2017 Day 13.)

[LANGUAGE: Python 3] Embarrassing/Embarrassing Ugly raw solution code

[LANGUAGE: Python 3] 66/101 Raw solution code

Python 3 21/12

It doesn't, but you can use a separate list, wrapper classes, and deque.index to find where the values live. I may be biased but I think that my solution (ultimately using deque) isn't as complex as a custom linked list.

Part 2 assumes you did part 1 properly. I did not! I'm pretty sure that the intended solution is to do a sort of reverse search (have a target number of geodes and work backwards to see if that's possible to achieve) but I was just not having success coming up with a way to do that. It's probably going to be blindingly obvious once I figure it out, but that might be an exercise for tomorrow.

Python 3 9/15!!!

Python 3 44/45