Very true. Luckily we have a multitude of tools in the toolbox with which to solve real-world problems. If we had to do it all in assembler life would be tedious indeed. In the same way that I don't use a hammer-drill to put a picture nail in a wall, I don't use assembler to build web APIs.
If all the people use C# instead of assembler, then programming will cease to be programming.
I disagree. The art of programming is to deliver the right solution in a clear and concise manner. Sure, we could written this in any number of ways, a for loop, a recursive algorithm, but it is more important to make your code readable than it is to make it work.
If using system libraries delivers a clearly understandable codebase that executes within required parameters, then use them. If they don't, dont.
beautiful, of course, but if all the time using system libraries, then programming will cease to be programming.
This comment is hidden because it contains spoiler information about the solution
Hahaha! Here I am doing for() loops. Well done! I suppose I should have checked to see if C# already had the wheel before I tried reinventing it!
I understand what do you mean. I am not presenting well. I agree that it is the best way for the computer to run.
I just want to say that not all know this method. It also require your math skill.
Not everyone has good math skill, but this method is the most fast way and clever.
I'm going to have to completely disagree with you banny127: this is the best answer because it was calculated before coding.
Math first; code later. Your CPU will thank you.
Programmers need to have a ton of tools in their toolbox, and your casual dismissal of "algebra" is, frankly, terrifying--given that all programming boils down to logical/mathematical computations.
That depends on the view of what is the best solution. However, in most computer algorithms the best solution (out of all that give correct results) the best is where is minimum used memory & CPU time. This is a solution in constant time because there was a previous analysis with pen & paper. That is what I call a real optimization - the author found a way of different solving of the same problem using less resources.
Duplicate issue. Closing.
I really like this Kata, even though I am unsure that this is a real 1kyu. I was surprised that my (mapless) solution to 4x4 did pass this 6x6.
To make it real 1kyu, I think that the solution should also handle cases of "not enough clues to solve" and "invalid clues combination".
Being easier is not an issue. 8 kyu is meant for the basics.