jhonesto: first submission

[jhonesto]

Check List:

• [x] Tests pass (./test.sh <username> shows no differences between expected and actual outputs)

• [x] All formatting changes by the build are committed

• [x] Your launch script is named calculate_average_<username>.sh (make sure to match casing of your GH user name) and is executable

• [x] Output matches that of calculate_average_baseline.sh

• [] For new entries, or after substantial changes: When implementing custom hash structures, please point to where you deal with hash collisions (line number) There is no custom hash structure here

• Execution time: 4.606 s

• Execution time of reference implementation: 3m20.823s

[gunnarmorling]

Gonna close this one, as the implementation isn't valid and there's no intention to make the required changes.

[jhonesto]

It's clear to me that you are unable to handle this situation and any argument presented here without facts is just hallucination.

I asked you to show me a collision test case, and you answered: "I cAn'T cReAtE a TeSt CaSe FoR eVeRy HaSh AlGoRiThM."

And I told you that the algorithm used Arrays.hashCode (that uses ArraysSupport.hashcode), is the same used in most implementations. We're not reinventing the wheel here, nor participating in a Cypherpunks contest. Therefore, it would only be a test case, with two lines demonstrating a collision. In this way, all implementations could be tested accordingly.

Now let's suppose that there is a collision, since you haven't shown me anything, if I increase the data type to long and use another more robust algorithm for hashing, and obviously passing the tests, will it be accepted by you?

Because at the end of the day I want to know if I'm participating in an One billion rows chalenge or wasting my time with the "SOME EGO INFLATED THAT DOESN'T KNOW HOW TO MAKE USEFULL TEST CASES." chalenge.

[gunnarmorling]

Look, I have explained to you why this implementation isn't valid, I have given you a test case failing on the eval machine which proves this. Not sure what else you expect me to do. "Works on my machine" is not a convincing argument.

[jhonesto]

You're right.

"It works on my machine" isn't an argument, and "it fails on my machine" isn't either. I'm trying to solve this problem.

Just answer my question with yes or no. Because I have read enough B.S. here.

Bye.