Turns out the initial trial of using
Manhattan distance was required to
solve part 2, since the BFS
implementation is impossible to
scale up from 2 robots to 25.
Recursion and memoization makes the
execution time acceptable.
Line 53 makes all the difference here.
The order of `<|v|^|>` matters when
constructing a sequence. Many
hours was spent trying to find the correct
priority. For the example input, especially
456A and 379A were volatile.
Hard one. Comparing to earlier years, the
difficulty level seems higher than usual. I blame
the LLM hipsters.
This one I asumed, but missed when I tried to
find it:
> "If a block contains free space, skip it instead."
Lucky me.
Got thrown of big time at pt 1 since there is a
duplicate test value in my puzzle input. The code
initially asumed that all test values should be
distinct. Biased from seeing "test" in the
termology, most likely.
Earlier editions of the code also tried to create
all combinations using binary strings, but it fell
short on pt 2 when a third operation was introduced.
From some inspiration in the solutions mega
thread on Reddit, the final code is queue-based
instead. Apparently, I also learned this kind of
problem is usually well suited for DFS search, and
apparently the final code very much is _in deed_
a DFS.
Felt paranoid on this one, was expecting something
much worse for pt2.
The code that solved the puzzle was _extremely_
naive:
- It asumes puzzle input only contains mul() with
1-3 chars. The versioned code have `{1,3}` as safe
guard.
- p2 asumed initial chunk does not begin with
"n't". Would have been easy to handle though.
- p2 asumed junk strings as "don", "do", "don()t"
would not exist.
In other words, I was really lucky since I did not
look that closely on puzzle input beforehand.
Might have cut 60-90 seconds further if I had just
ran pt2 immidately instead of staring dumbly on the
test data (that changed for pt2).
Also, I got reminded that \d in regular expressions
is equal to `0-9`: it does not include commas and
punctations. The code that solved the puzzle was
paranoid and instead used `0-9`.
Managed to score ~1500th somehow despite this.
