I have a 7*7 matrix containing 0s and 1s in which each (x,y) will be checked for how many of its neighbors are a 1. I am a beginner to python, and will only be using basic programming procedures.
I have:
for x in range(rows):
for y in range(cols):
lives = 0
lives = neighbors(matrix, rows, cols)
def neighbors(matrix, rows, cols):
if matrix[x][y+1] == 1:
lives += 1
if matrix[x-1][y+1] == 1:
lives += 1
#All 8 positions are checked like this
return lives
I am getting the ol indexing error. This seems like a very simple problem I just can't seem to figure out how to fix it.
First of all, the index error occurs when you do y+1. Since you are going in the range of the amount of cols, this will end up being cols+1, which is out of range.
What you can do is use a try-except block, or make sure it doesn't get out of range through only looping to cols-1.
Additionally your function definition is redundant, since you don't use all your input parameters, and you access the x and y variables in the global scope.
The easiest thing to do is probably just to remove the definition and the return-statement.
This should work:
for x in range(rows):
for y in range(cols-1): #Loop until the second to last element.
lives = 0
if matrix[x][y+1] == 1:
lives += 1
if x == 0: #You probably don't want to check x-1 = -1
continue
if matrix[x-1][y+1] == 1:
lives += 1
Related
I am trying to write a function that returns true or false if a given string has exactly 6 consecutive characters with the same value. If the string has more or less than 6, it will return false:
I am not allowed to use lists, sets or import any packages. I am only restricted to while loops, for loops, and utilizing basic mathematical operations
Two example runs are shown below:
Enter a string: 367777776
True
Enter a string: 3677777777776
False
Note that although I entered numbers, it is actually a string within the function argument for example: consecutive('3777776')
I tried to convert the string into an ASCII table and then try and filter out the numbers there. However, I
def consecutive(x):
storage= ' '
acc=0
count=0
for s in x:
storage+= str(ord(s)) + ' '
acc+=ord(s)
if acc == acc:
count+=1
for s in x-1:
return count
My intention is to compare the previous character's ASCII code to the current character's ASCII code in the string. If the ASCII doesnt match, I will add an accumulator for it. The accumulator will list the number of duplicates. From there, I will implement an if-else statement to see if it is greater or less than 6 However, I have a hard time translating my thoughts into python code.
Can anyone assist me?
That's a pretty good start!
A few comments:
Variables storage and acc play the same role, and are a little more complicated than they have to be. All you want to know when you arrive at character s is whether or not s is identical to the previous character. So, you only need to store the previously seen character.
Condition acc == acc is always going to be True. I think you meant acc == s?
When you encounter an identical character, you correctly increase the count with count += 1. However, when we change characters, you should reset the count.
With these comments in mind, I fixed your code, then blanked out a few parts for you to fill. I've also renamed storage and acc to previous_char which I think is more explicit.
def has_6_consecutive(x):
previous_char = None
count = 0
for s in x:
if s == previous_char:
???
elif count == 6:
???
else:
???
previous_char = ???
???
You could use recursion. Loop over all the characters and for each one check to see of the next 6 are identical. If so, return true. If you get to the end of the array (or even within 6 characters of the end), return false.
For more info on recursion, check this out: https://www.programiz.com/python-programming/recursion
would something like this be allowed?
def consecF(n):
consec = 1
prev = n[0]
for i in n:
if i==prev:
consec+=1
else:
consec=1
if consec == 6:
return True
prev = i
return False
n = "12111123333221"
print(consecF(n))
You can try a two pointer approach, where the left pointer is fixed at the first instance of some digit and the right one is shifted as long as the digit is seen.
def consecutive(x):
left = 0
while left != len(x):
right = left
while right < len(x) and x[right] == x[left]:
right += 1
length = (right - 1) - left + 1 # from left to right - 1 inclusive, x[left] repeated
if length == 6: # found desired length
return True
left = right
return False # no segment found
tests = [
'3677777777776',
'367777776'
]
for test in tests:
print(f"{test}: {consecutive(test)}")
Output
3677777777776: False
367777776: True
You should store the current sequence of repeated chars.
def consecutive(x):
sequencechar = ' '
repetitions = 0
for ch in x:
if ch != sequencechar:
if repetitions == 6:
break
sequencechar = ch
repetitions = 1
else:
repetitions += 1
return repetitions == 6
If I could, I would not have given the entire solution, but this still is a simple problem. However one has to take care of some points.
As you see the current sequence is stored, and when the sequence is ended and a new starts, on having found a correct sequence it breaks out of the for loop.
Also after the for loop ends normally, the last sequence is checked (which was not done in the loop).
I need to write a loop
for x in (1..y)
where the y variable can be changed somehow. How can I do that?
For example:
for x in (1..y/x)
But it does not work.
Normally we'd use a loop do with a guard clause:
x = 1
loop do
break if x >= y
x += 1
...
end
Make sure y is larger than x or it'll never do anything. y can change if necessary and as long as it's greater than x the loop will continue. As soon as y drops below x the loop will terminate on the next iteration.
Note: I use >= because testing for equality is a bug-in-waiting. Sometimes we try to compare where x starts out greater than y or we are incrementing a float and comparing it to an integer or another float and using == and never hit the magic "equal" causing the loop to run away. Instead always check for a greater-than-or-equal to end the loop.
I think you might be confused about return values. This actually works fine, it's just that the return value is equal to the original range.
y = 4
for x in (1..y)
puts x
end
# 1
# 2
# 3
# 4
#=> 1..4
Here's a code snippet to prove it.
given a grid of paths with different width, how can i find a path which leads to the end point?
The path is going to be represented by a two dimentional array where 0 means cannot be walk on, 1 means it is walkable, 2 represents starting point and 3 represents end point. Consider the following example:
21111111100000
00000011000000
00001111111111
00001111100111
00001110000101
00001111100113
in the above example the width of a path varies from 1 to 3, and there exists many solutions which would lead to the end point. I want to find one path which leads to it and the path does not have to be the shortest one (should not be the longest one either). The width of each path is unknown which means the grid could be all "1"s except the starting and end point.
Edited: The path should not contain uneccessary "wasted" walk meaning that if a vertical path has width 2 the result should not just walk down the path and then take one step right then walk all the way up
I agree with Calumn: DFS is the simplest approach here. Here is a simple solution in python-like pseudocode. It will print the solution as a sequence of 'L','R',U','D' to indicate left,right,up, or down.
def flood(x,y,story):
if (visited[x][y] or map[x][y]=='0'): return;
visited[x][y]=True;
if (map[x][y]=='3'):
print 'done. The path is: '+story
return
if (x<len(a[0])): flood(x+1,y,story+'R')
if (y<len(a)): flood(x,y+1,story+'D')
if (x>0): flood(x-1,y,story+'L')
if (y>0): flood(x,y-1,story+'U')
def solve(map):
visited = array_of_false_of_same_size_as(map)
x,y = find_the_two(map)
flood(x,y,'')
The optimization of making it stop as soon as it finds a solution is left as an exercise to the reader (you could make flood return a boolean to indicate if it found something, or use a global flag).
(p.s. I made this answer community wiki since I'm just clarifying Calumn's answer. I can't claim much credit)
Breadth-First Search version, also in Python
For what it's worth, and just to show that breadth-first search is not that complicated, an actual runnable program in Python:
def find(grid, xstart=0, ystart=0):
# Maps (xi,yi) to (x(i-1), y(i-1))
prev = {(xstart, ystart):None}
# Prepare for the breadth-first search
queue = [(xstart, ystart)]
qpos = 0
# Possibly enqueue a trial coordinate
def enqueue(prevxy, dx, dy):
x = prevxy[0] + dx
y = prevxy[1] + dy
xy = (x, y)
# Check that it hasn't been visited and the coordinates
# are valid and the grid position is not a 0
if (xy not in prev
and x >= 0 and x < len(grid)
and y >= 0 and y < len(grid[x])
and grid[x][y] != 0):
# Record the history (and the fact that we've been here)
prev[xy] = prevxy
# If we found the target, signal success
if grid[x][y] == 3:
return xy
# Otherwise, queue the new coordinates
else:
queue.append(xy)
return None
# The actual breadth-first search
while qpos < len(queue):
xy = queue[qpos]
qpos += 1
found = ( enqueue(xy, 1, 0)
or enqueue(xy, 0, 1)
or enqueue(xy, -1, 0)
or enqueue(xy, 0, -1))
if found: break
# Recover the path
path = []
while found:
path.append(found)
found = prev[found]
path.reverse()
return path
# Test run
grid = [ [2,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,0,0,0,0,0]
, [0,0,0,0,0,0,1,1,0,0,0,0,0,0]
, [0,0,0,0,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1]
, [0,0,0,0,1,1,1,1,1,0,0,1,1,1]
, [0,0,0,0,1,1,1,0,0,0,0,1,0,1]
, [0,0,0,0,1,1,1,1,1,0,0,1,1,3]
]
for x, y in find(grid): grid[x][y]='*'
print '\n'.join(''.join(str(p) for p in line) for line in grid)
Output:
*******1100000
000000*1000000
000011******11
00001111100*11
00001110000*01
00001111100***
I am writing in MATLAB a program that checks whether two elements A and B were exchanged in ranking positions.
Example
Assume the first ranking is:
list1 = [1 2 3 4]
while the second one is:
list2 = [1 2 4 3]
I want to check whether A = 3 and B = 4 have exchanged relative positions in the rankings, which in this case is true, since in the first ranking 3 comes before 4 and in the second ranking 3 comes after 4.
Procedure
In order to do this, I have written the following MATLAB code:
positionA1 = find(list1 == A);
positionB1 = find(list1 == B);
positionA2 = find(list2 == A);
positionB2 = find(list2 == B);
if (positionA1 <= positionB1 && positionA2 >= positionB2) || ...
(positionA1 >= positionB1 && positionA2 <= positionB2)
... do something
end
Unfortunately, I need to run this code a lot of times, and the find function is really slow (but needed to get the element position in the list).
I was wondering if there is a way of speeding up the procedure. I have also tried to write a MEX file that performs in C the find operation, but it did not help.
If the lists don't change within your loop, then you can determine the positions of the items ahead of time.
Assuming that your items are always integers from 1 to N:
[~, positions_1] = sort( list1 );
[~, positions_2] = sort( list2 );
This way you won't need to call find within the loop, you can just do:
positionA1 = positions_1(A);
positionB1 = positions_1(B);
positionA2 = positions_2(A);
positionB2 = positions_2(B);
If your loop is going over all possible combinations of A and B, then you can also vectorize that
Find the elements that exchanged relative ranking:
rank_diff_1 = bsxfun(#minus, positions_1, positions_1');
rank_diff_2 = bsxfun(#minus, positions_2, positions_2');
rel_rank_changed = sign(rank_diff_1) ~= sign(rank_diff_2);
[A_changed, B_changed] = find(rel_rank_changed);
Optional: Throw out half of the results, because if (3,4) is in the list, then (4,3) also will be, and maybe you don't want that:
mask = (A_changed < B_changed);
A_changed = A_changed(mask);
B_changed = B_changed(mask);
Now loop over only those elements that have exchanged relative ranking
for ii = 1:length(A_changed)
A = A_changed(ii);
B = B_changed(ii);
% Do something...
end
Instead of find try to compute something like this
Check if there is any exchanged values.
if logical(sum(abs(list1-list2)))
do something
end;
For specific values A and B:
if (list1(logical((list1-list2)-abs((list1-list2))))==A)&&(list1(logical((list1-list2)+abs((list1-list2))))==B)
do something
end;
For instance:
8 > 10 = true, since 8 is divisible by 2 three times and 10 only once.
How can I compare two integers from any range of numbers? Are the modulo and divide operator capable of doing this task?
Use binary caculate to judge it
def devided_by_two(i)
return i.to_s(2).match(/0*$/).to_s.count('0')
end
To make integer divisibility by 2, just transcode it to binary and judge how many zero from end of banary number. The code I provide can be more simple I think.
Yes, they are capable. A number is even if, when you divide it by two, the remainder is zero.
Hence, you can use a loop to continuously divide by two until you get an odd number, keeping a count of how many times you did it.
The (pseudo-code) function for assigning a "divisibility by two, continuously" value to a number would be something like:
def howManyDivByTwo(x):
count = 0
while x % 2 == 0:
count = count + 1
x = x / 2 # make sure integer division
return count
That shouldn't be too hard to turn into Ruby (or any procedural-type language, really), such as:
def howManyDivByTwo(x)
count = 0
while x % 2 == 0
count = count + 1
x = x / 2
end
return count
end
print howManyDivByTwo(4), "\n"
print howManyDivByTwo(10), "\n"
print howManyDivByTwo(11), "\n"
print howManyDivByTwo(65536), "\n"
This outputs the correct:
2
1
0
16
Astute readers will have noticed there's an edge case in that function, you probably don't want to try passing zero to it. If it was production code, you'd need to catch that and act intelligently since you can divide zero by two until the cows come home, without ever reaching an odd number.
What value you return for zero depends on needs you haven't specified in detail. Theoretically (mathematically), you should return infinity but I'll leave that up to you.
Notice that you will likely mess up much of your code if you redefine such basic method. Knowing that, this is how it's done:
class Integer
def <=> other
me = self
return 0 if me.zero? and other.zero?
return -1 if other.zero?
return 1 if me.zero?
while me.even? and other.even?
me /= 2
other /= 2
end
return 0 if me.odd? and other.odd?
return -1 if me.odd?
return 1 if other.odd? # This condition is redundant, but is here for symmetry.
end
end