han97 profile - python coding challenges

5

msmyxz

First-msmyxz 2

Better use join method of strings to concatenate strings More

18

Margaruga

First-Margaruga 1

U dont have to calculate len of intersection of sets. Read a formula in this article: [wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inclusion%E2%80%93exclusion_principle) More

22

narimiran

Numbers Factory - 2nd-narimiran 1

instead of "98765432", better write range(9, 1, -1) More

40

suic

First-suic 1 1

Use getattr built-in function. For example: getattr(hashlib, "md5") -> hashlib.md5 More

30

makoto_yamagata

pow/enumerate-makoto_yamagata 1

if u write if i == True: return True , shouldn't it work? less condition checking in the loop -> faster More

5

cierand

for loop & if statement-cierand 1 1

You should use built-in function called "len" instead of calculate it manually. Example: len([1, 2, 3]) retrieves 2. More

21

jmegner

one function handles all of the multiple-of-rank hands; I think I did okay job with straight and flush stuff-jmegner 1 1

Nice trick with fucntools.partial. Haven't know 'bout it More

33

Kurush

First-Kurush 1

better use deque of collections module, cause its faster. More

45

kurosawa4434

First-kurosawa4434 1

Look at this method: https://docs.python.org/2/library/stdtypes.html#str.zfill More

21

hanpari

Chess knights move-hanpari 1 1

Creating a dict to check coordinates being in bounds? Isn't it faster to just check coordinates? like 0<=xMore

35

yoichi

Recursion with cache-yoichi 1

if u used this, it would be easier:[python docs](https://docs.python.org/3.2/library/functools.html#functools.lru_cache) More

30

makoto_yamagata

pow/enumerate-makoto_yamagata 1

I just realised that, pow(n, True, i) == n % i This is awesome, man :D More

18

Margaruga

First-Margaruga 1

And better use max function instead of implementing it More

18

Margaruga

First-Margaruga 1

for j, another in enumerate(words): if i != j: sumlikeness += calculate_likeness(word, another instead of calc it the C way, use sum fucntion. More

19

ludek.reif

Co-ludek.reif 1 1

it is not fast, better use sets and intersection method (set1 & set2) More

14

tommy6073

bin(), str(), then count('1')-tommy6073 1

no need to str(). Bin retrieves a string More

12

tomkun

One-liner-tomkun 1 1

use count method of string instead. and why do u use str() on bin returned value? bin returns str type More

4

Ginger03

Even the last 2-Ginger03 1

Better use slicing for it. Like this: array[::2]. First two parameters are for begin and end indexes. If you want whole list, you don't touch it (for example [1,2,3][:] will retrieve the same list). Third parameter is for "step". For array=[0,1,2,3,4,5] it will retrieve [0,2,4]. More

8

Gideon

Simple-Gideon

Better use "join" method of strings. More

15

thibault.dereu

First-thibault.dereu

not very fast, mine is faster :D Checked with timeit for 19 rings: 12.9365308285 43.1890509129 More