Talk:Longest common substring: Difference between revisions

From Rosetta Code
Content added Content deleted
(→‎Duplicate?: don't think so)
(→‎Duplicate?: Thanks. Looks good.)
Line 7: Line 7:
:All I know is, Longest Common Subsequence didn't solve my problem, but Longest Common Substring does. That's enough reason for me for it to co-exist. --[[User:Geoffhacker|Geoffhacker]] ([[User talk:Geoffhacker|talk]]) 21:17, 18 February 2015 (UTC)
:All I know is, Longest Common Subsequence didn't solve my problem, but Longest Common Substring does. That's enough reason for me for it to co-exist. --[[User:Geoffhacker|Geoffhacker]] ([[User talk:Geoffhacker|talk]]) 21:17, 18 February 2015 (UTC)
:I originally thought this was a dup, and changed my mind. Seems quite different to me, and of much more interest to bioinformaticians than the other algorithm. --[[User:TimToady|TimToady]] ([[User talk:TimToady|talk]]) 06:16, 19 February 2015 (UTC)
:I originally thought this was a dup, and changed my mind. Seems quite different to me, and of much more interest to bioinformaticians than the other algorithm. --[[User:TimToady|TimToady]] ([[User talk:TimToady|talk]]) 06:16, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing out the difference Geoffhacker. Keep those new tasks rollin' ...<br>
--[[User:Paddy3118|Paddy3118]] ([[User talk:Paddy3118|talk]]) 11:51, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Revision as of 11:51, 19 February 2015

Duplicate?

It seems that this is a duplicate of Longest Common Subsequence?
If not, is it unique enough to co-exist? --Paddy3118 (talk) 13:56, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

It looks like this one only counts consecutive letters and doesn't allow the subsequence to be split. I vote too similar to co-exist. --Mwn3d (talk) 21:13, 18 February 2015 (UTC)
I know it's not a duplicate, because Longest Common Subsequence produces different results. For example, the longest common subsequence between "thisisatest" and "testing123testing" is "tsitest". The longest common substring is just "test". I was going to use my code as an example of dynamic programming in Longest Common Subsequence until I noticed the difference in the algorithms. Longest Common Subsequence skips characters in the middle of a string, whereas Longest Common Substring only considers consecutive characters. For that matter, the two problems also have separate Wikipedia articles, for what it's worth.
All I know is, Longest Common Subsequence didn't solve my problem, but Longest Common Substring does. That's enough reason for me for it to co-exist. --Geoffhacker (talk) 21:17, 18 February 2015 (UTC)
I originally thought this was a dup, and changed my mind. Seems quite different to me, and of much more interest to bioinformaticians than the other algorithm. --TimToady (talk) 06:16, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing out the difference Geoffhacker. Keep those new tasks rollin' ...
--Paddy3118 (talk) 11:51, 19 February 2015 (UTC)