http://lojic.com/blog/2007/09/10/escape-from-zurg/ Sun, 25 Dec 2011 09:28:24 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 http://lojic.com/blog/2007/09/10/escape-from-zurg/comment-page-1/#comment-6389 Scott Moonen Sat, 08 Aug 2009 19:36:15 +0000 http://lojic.com/blog/2007/09/10/escape-from-zurg/#comment-6389 Brian, I gave this a try in Clojure. You can see my solution over here: http://scott.andstuff.org/ClojureSpikes. Brian, I gave this a try in Clojure. You can see my solution over here: http://scott.andstuff.org/ClojureSpikes.

]]> http://lojic.com/blog/2007/09/10/escape-from-zurg/comment-page-1/#comment-82 Colin Jones Fri, 25 Jul 2008 18:13:53 +0000 http://lojic.com/blog/2007/09/10/escape-from-zurg/#comment-82 Thanks! I found this on Google searching for a Ruby combinations algorithm (it's built into the Array class on Ruby 1.8.7, but I'm limited to Ruby 1.8.6). Thanks! I found this on Google searching for a Ruby combinations algorithm (it’s built into the Array class on Ruby 1.8.7, but I’m limited to Ruby 1.8.6).

]]> http://lojic.com/blog/2007/09/10/escape-from-zurg/comment-page-1/#comment-81 Brian Adkins Tue, 11 Sep 2007 01:11:40 +0000 http://lojic.com/blog/2007/09/10/escape-from-zurg/#comment-81 It looks like the more functional approach has side benefits. I timed the op's code and mine, and mine took ~32s vs. ~116 for the op's. I don't have time to analyze the difference, but I posted a note on comp.lang.ruby with profile output in case anyone feels like analyzing it. It looks like the more functional approach has side benefits. I timed the op’s code and mine, and mine took ~32s vs. ~116 for the op’s. I don’t have time to analyze the difference, but I posted a note on comp.lang.ruby with profile output in case anyone feels like analyzing it.

]]>