Hacker News Reader

Comment by lqet | Hacker News Reader

> That python code is horrid.

Just out of curiosity, why do you find the code horrid? There are really only 9 lines of code that aren't glue code, and apart from the error prints (which are really irrelevant for these demonstration purposes), the code looks basically fine to me.

EDIT:

  seen = []
  for b in boards:    
      if set(seen).isdisjoint(orbit(b)):
          seen.append(b)

Ah, well...

EDIT 2: also, see comment below, it's not Python

View on HN

Sage is a Python (and the snippet you pasted works fine in Python). And I'm also curious what would qualify that code as "horrid." I'd make light suggestion to improve performance by making `seen` a set right off the bat, but for this size of problem, that sort of detail is unimportant. Calling somebody's code "horrid" without even understanding what it's doing isn't a productive approach to, well; anything, really.

I was primarily offended by the second code snippet, in which there is a variable named foundException but it is not an exception.

I didn't realize it was Sage (I didn't know that existed) but I'm not sure that actually makes a difference. Obviously it works, and that's fine, but it's still horribly ugly.

> named foundException but it is not an exception

They don't mean "found an execution exception", they literally mean that the code found an exception to the rule that n^9 + 4n^6 + n^5 + 2n^3 is divisible by 8.

Yeah I understand that. You still shouldn't do it.

edit: nevermind, it's sage code not python code

It's not python, it's sage, so those actually work.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com