Weather routing: Difference between revisions

{{trans|Julia}}

This runs in only 37 seconds which is surprisingly quick compared to Julia. However, I've just noticed that I'm using an out of date version of Julia (1.0.4) so hopefully the latest version will be able to close the gap.

import (

fmt.Println("The route taking the least time found was:\n", tp.path, "\nwhich has duration",

int(tp.duration/60), "hours,", int(math.Round(math.Mod(tp.duration, 60))), "minutes.")

{{out}}

=={{header|Julia}}==

Brute force optimization search, practical for shorter path lengths, but would require a better algorithm for paths over twice this size.

using DelimitedFiles

println("The route taking the least time found was:\n ", tp.path,

"\nwhich has duration $(div(tp.duration, 60)) hours, $(rem(tp.duration, 60)) minutes.")

The polar CSV file used for this solution, named polar.csv, is as follows. Note that this is a very detailed

polar, chosen to stress the testing of the code. Most polar files are far smaller,

The Go version runs in about 44 seconds on my computer. This Nim version, compiled in release mode (which includes runtime checks), runs in 22 seconds (18 seconds if link time optimization is activated). When compiled without checks (“danger” mode), it runs in 15.5 seconds.

type

echo "The route taking the least time found was:"

echo tp.path

{{out}}

=={{header|Phix}}==

{{trans|Go}}

<span style="color: #000080;font-style:italic;">--

-- demo\rosetta\Weather_Routing.exw

<span style="color: #0000FF;">{}</span> <span style="color: #0000FF;">=</span> <span style="color: #7060A8;">wait_key</span><span style="color: #0000FF;">()</span>

{{out}}

<pre>

As you'd expect, this takes many times longer than Julia to run (about 24.5 minutes versus 3 minutes 20 seconds) but gets there in the end :)

/*

var tp = minimumTimeRoute.call(routeProb, sp, false)

System.print("The route taking the least time found was:\n %(tp.path) \nwhich has duration " +

{{out}}