Welcome to Software Development on Codidact!
Will you help us build our independent community of developers helping developers? We're small and trying to grow. We welcome questions about all aspects of software development, from design to code to QA and more. Got questions? Got answers? Got code you'd like someone to review? Please join us.
Post History
You don't need a regex for this. To find first you can simply iterate through the line until you find a digit. To find second you can do the same but in reverse. This is more efficient than running...
Answer
#3: Post edited
by
matthewsnyder
·
2024-07-18T21:14:33Z (3 months ago)
You don't need a regex for this. To find `first` you can simply iterate through the line until you find a digit. To find `second` you do the same but in reverse. This is more efficient than running a regex.- For a problem as small as the example, it doesn't matter and arguably the regex adds readability. But I assume AoC makes you run this on a much bigger input as well.
- You also don't need to construct the calibration number as a string. `first*10 + second` gives the calibration number.
- When finding the digits, you can do a time-space tradeoff by creating a hashmap that maps each char 0-9 to the corresponding digit. Plugging the chars into this map is probably faster than parsing the string to an integer.
- You don't need a regex for this. To find `first` you can simply iterate through the line until you find a digit. To find `second` you can do the same but in reverse. This is more efficient than running a regex.
- For a problem as small as the example, it doesn't matter and arguably the regex adds readability. But I assume AoC makes you run this on a much bigger input as well.
- You also don't need to construct the calibration number as a string. `first*10 + second` gives the calibration number.
- When finding the digits, you can do a time-space tradeoff by creating a hashmap that maps each char 0-9 to the corresponding digit. Plugging the chars into this map is probably faster than parsing the string to an integer.
#2: Post edited
by
matthewsnyder
·
2024-07-18T21:14:19Z (3 months ago)
You don't need a regex for this. To find `first` you simply iterate through the line until you find a digit. To find `second` you do the same but in reverse. This is more efficient than running a regex.- For a problem as small as the example, it doesn't matter and arguably the regex adds readability. But I assume AoC makes you run this on a much bigger input as well.
- You also don't need to construct the calibration number as a string. `first*10 + second` gives the calibration number.
- When finding the digits, you can do a time-space tradeoff by creating a hashmap that maps each char 0-9 to the corresponding digit. Plugging the chars into this map is probably faster than parsing the string to an integer.
- You don't need a regex for this. To find `first` you can simply iterate through the line until you find a digit. To find `second` you do the same but in reverse. This is more efficient than running a regex.
- For a problem as small as the example, it doesn't matter and arguably the regex adds readability. But I assume AoC makes you run this on a much bigger input as well.
- You also don't need to construct the calibration number as a string. `first*10 + second` gives the calibration number.
- When finding the digits, you can do a time-space tradeoff by creating a hashmap that maps each char 0-9 to the corresponding digit. Plugging the chars into this map is probably faster than parsing the string to an integer.
#1: Initial revision
by
matthewsnyder
·
2024-07-17T06:10:56Z (3 months ago)
You don't need a regex for this. To find `first` you simply iterate through the line until you find a digit. To find `second` you do the same but in reverse. This is more efficient than running a regex. For a problem as small as the example, it doesn't matter and arguably the regex adds readability. But I assume AoC makes you run this on a much bigger input as well. You also don't need to construct the calibration number as a string. `first*10 + second` gives the calibration number. When finding the digits, you can do a time-space tradeoff by creating a hashmap that maps each char 0-9 to the corresponding digit. Plugging the chars into this map is probably faster than parsing the string to an integer.