Revision as of 18:04, 16 October 2007 view source rosettacode>IanOsgood No edit summary ← Older edit		Revision as of 19:59, 16 October 2007 view source rosettacode>JimD No edit summary Newer edit →
Line 2: ---- Oddly enough it seems that the only doors left open after all the passes are complete are those which are perfect squares of integers: 1, 4, 9, 16, 25, 36, 49, 64, 81, and 100 ~~Triviallly~~Trivially trying the same code for 1000 doors and 1000 mutative passes seems to suggest that this is true for larger numbers (though ~~its~~it's far from proven). I should, undoubtely, do a proper analysis to see if I can prove that it generalizes and explain why.[[User:JimD\|JimD]] 16:03, 11 October 2007 (MDT) :The number of times a door is visited is the same as the number of factors of the door's index. Open doors have been visited an odd number of times and only perfect squares have an odd number of factors. This [http://olimu.com/Notes/Monkeys&Doors.htm] explains it.[[User:Drea\|Drea]] 16:20, 11 October 2007 (MDT) ---- Line 9: :That was me, and you're absolutely right. I was just about to post a MAXScript version. I'll have to leave the Perl and Ada versions to someone else though. [[User:Drea\|Drea]] 16:16, 15 October 2007 (MDT) :Unless we think that this kind of optimisation is beyond the scope of Rosetta Code? I'm not sure, but I thought I'd throw it out there. [[User:Drea\|Drea]] 16:23, 15 October 2007 (MDT) ::Or is the problem itself beyond the scope of Rosetta Code? What does the 100 Doors task show off about a langauge that is not covered in one of the other tasks? --[[User:IanOsgood\|IanOsgood]] 12:04, 16 October 2007 (MDT)

Talk:100 doors: Difference between revisions