Comments on: Project Euler, Problem #1 http://ifdebug.com/project-euler-problem-1/ Technical thoughts of a coffee addicted developer Fri, 22 Oct 2010 13:14:40 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.2 By: Alistair http://ifdebug.com/project-euler-problem-1/comment-page-1/#comment-1191 Alistair Wed, 24 Sep 2008 13:41:32 +0000 http://ifdebug.com/?p=107#comment-1191 Andrew, There are plenty of different ways to solve the problems and there aren't extra points for elegant versus brute force solutions. In your example, a solution like that would work so long as you could remove the duplicate items from the two lists. As an example, the first range statement will include the value 30, which will also be present in the second list. As such, it'll be summed twice and you'd get an inflated result. Al Andrew,

There are plenty of different ways to solve the problems and there aren’t extra points for elegant versus brute force solutions.

In your example, a solution like that would work so long as you could remove the duplicate items from the two lists. As an example, the first range statement will include the value 30, which will also be present in the second list. As such, it’ll be summed twice and you’d get an inflated result.

Al

]]> By: Andrew http://ifdebug.com/project-euler-problem-1/comment-page-1/#comment-1189 Andrew Wed, 24 Sep 2008 12:15:20 +0000 http://ifdebug.com/?p=107#comment-1189 Could you have summed with the range stepping set to 3 & 5 rather than a brute force 'try all numbers' approach with singular stepping ? ie you already know the steps must be in 3s and 5s. For example: sum[range(0,1000,3) + range(0,1000,5)] This gives 266333. Could you have summed with the range stepping set to 3 & 5 rather than a brute force ‘try all numbers’ approach with singular stepping ?

ie you already know the steps must be in 3s and 5s.

For example:

sum[range(0,1000,3) + range(0,1000,5)]

This gives 266333.

]]>