Bill Blogs in C# - All Comments

Improved Search Engine Placement Using Unique Internet Business Training Program

Improved Search Engine Placement Using Unique Internet Business Training Program — Sat, 10 May 2008 01:51:17 GMT

It\'s been really long since I started reading your posts and today I just want to say that your blog is great!

euler

euler — Tue, 29 Apr 2008 20:32:38 GMT

Pingback from euler

re: A Functional Programming Q & A

Dianne Marsh — Tue, 29 Apr 2008 19:45:54 GMT

In Scala, you could do:

val leftVector = Array(0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9)

val rightVector = Array(9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1, 0)

val answer =

for ((v1, v2) <- leftVector zip rightVector)

yield v1 + v2

Likewise, the multiply just changes the yield statement to yield v1 * v2

re: A Functional Programming Q & A

Dustin Campbell — Mon, 28 Apr 2008 15:25:46 GMT

Since IEnumerator<T> implements IDisposable, it's probably a good practice to declare leftEnumerator and rightEnumerator inside using statements.

Hello World!

//TODO — Mon, 28 Apr 2008 15:15:34 GMT

Well it finally happened.  First it was a subtle hint, “we’re giving you all blogs in

re: Project Euler problem 6

Francois Tanguay — Sat, 12 Apr 2008 05:00:56 GMT

I know it probably isn't as performant since we loop twice (althoug there is less instanciations), but I find the following approach easier to understand:

int sum = Enumerable.Range(1, 100).Sum();

int sumOfSquare = Enumerable.Range(1, 100).Select(i => i * i).Sum();

int diff = (sum * sum) - sumOfSquare;

http://srtsolutions.com/blogs/billwagner/archive/2007/10/31/the-c-team-and-habitat-for-humanity.aspx

Thu, 10 Apr 2008 16:24:49 GMT

Pingback from srtsolutions.com/.../the-c-team-and-habitat-for-humanity.aspx

re: Euler Problem 5

george byrkit — Wed, 09 Apr 2008 11:59:54 GMT

Dear Bill,

The new listing format just drives my eyes crazy! The effect of the alternating white with text and black bars to me seems difficult to read. And with my 'old eyes' and progressive bifocals, it seems to 'swim' before my eyes. I can imagine that it must be worse on a CRT than on an LCD panel?

It's a great series, btw!

re: Euler Problem 4: Finding Palindrome numbers

wwagner — Tue, 08 Apr 2008 01:37:20 GMT

A couple folks asked if the Enumerable.Range() call should be Enumerable.Range(100,999) rather than Enumerable.Range(100,900.

The second parameter on the API is the number of elements, not the ending value. So, to get values from 100 through 999, it's (100,900), not (100,999). Oh well.

re: Euler Problem 4: Finding Palindrome numbers

Joe — Tue, 08 Apr 2008 00:49:06 GMT

Very elegant code. I especially like "orderby product descending".

BTW, shouldn't the ranges go to 999?

re: Euler Problem 4: Finding Palindrome numbers

Kyle — Mon, 07 Apr 2008 22:38:08 GMT

On the way home tonight, I realized that it's impossible to reverse engineer the reverse-then-add algorithm effectively (due to it basically not being a 1-to-1 function). Hence, strike my comments!

re: Euler Problem 4: Finding Palindrome numbers

Kyle — Mon, 07 Apr 2008 21:24:00 GMT

Whoops, forgot to mention that you keep doing the reverse then add part and it'll eventually converge (for most numbers).

re: Euler Problem 4: Finding Palindrome numbers

Kyle — Mon, 07 Apr 2008 21:22:32 GMT

Cool little algorithm. Something interesting to add to it might be finding the first number of the reverse-then-add* series to produce the palindrome. I imagine that would be significantly harder, though!

* note: I think this is also called the 196-algorithm. It's the algorithm where you take a number A, reverse it to make B, then add A and B together. This algorithm is known to produce a palindrome for most numbers very quickly. 196 was the first number found (I believe) for which it does not produce a palindrome, as far as we can tell, ever. I say as far as we can tell, because I don't believe it has even been inductively shown yet; we just haven't been able to find the end of the series, if there is one!

re: Euler Problem 4: Finding Palindrome numbers

James Curran — Mon, 07 Apr 2008 16:49:00 GMT

>> Enumerable.Range(100, 900)

Shouldn't those be Enumerable.Range(100, 999)

Project Euler in Ruby

Lazy Evaluation — Sun, 06 Apr 2008 18:06:50 GMT

I'm taking Bill Wagner up on his Project Euler challenge , but in Ruby. I've secretly wanted