Closed PaulBellette closed 7 years ago
:+1: Looks good to me.
A bit mind bending, but I think this is correct.
It looks like the entire code could potentially be rearranged so that zero_locations
is tracked as tuples the same way that you track it in the new find_smallest_uncovered
. Perhaps if this was a Set
things would be simpler and more efficient in the removal and addition of zeros? Not sure.
Hi,
Have been playing a little bit and made a small change in how find_smallest_uncovered works. Tiny bit faster and less mind bending (hopefully). Also took out my awesome_print_debug function. In the process of looking at this stuff I also found a performance issue with using the modified cost type. The Base.get_index modification is slower than it should be. Will make an issue about this...