I get "Wrong answer" with the following code for the same problem... Is there something strange in this code : module Main where import qualified Data.ByteString.Char8 as B main = B.getLine >>= sequence_ . flip replicate hot . maybe 0 fst . B.readInt hot = do B.getLine men <- B.getLine women <- B.getLine print $ sum $ zipWith (*) (map (maybe 0 fst . B.readInt) $ B.words men) (map (maybe 0 fst . B.readInt) $ B.words women) ??? I get the expected results with my tests. -- Jedaï

On 8/9/07, Chaddaï Fouché wrote:

I get "Wrong answer" with the following code for the same problem... Is there something strange in this code :

This problem description is not worded very well. You have to figure out the matching that maximizes the sum of hotnesses; you don't necessarily just do a sum . zipWith (*). -Brent

On 8/9/07, Marc Weber wrote:

...

I wrote a code, but seems to give "Time limit exceeded"! ?? Your code writes 15 to stdout which is correct (with the example given on the page).. You have to explain what you mean by >>seems to give "Time limit exceeded"<<

...

loop t function Does already exist. sequence $ replicate 10 function is a much shorter way :-)

oor perhaps mapM_ [ function | i <- [1..10] ] )

prod, to_int: You can both implement using higher order functions

prod = sum . zipWith (*) to_int = map read

Thanks :) Yes, I see no reason why the code should be rejected by the judge (Time limit exceeded) just because I had defined all the functions. I had done this on many other occasions, and they all had worked well. I think that it has a lot to do with the (read) function and how it is implemented. So parsing takes quite a bit of time, and eventually most of the time gets used up in processing input. But the new functions are wonderful :-) I had a hunch that these functions should have been defined, but I learnt a lot in the process of writing those functions again! -- Vimal