| Title |
User |
Message |
Date Posted |
| Re: Re: Re: Re: landmark name |
bbi5291 |
OK, so this seems to be getting a bit silly, because Seyon can't possibly tell that some of us are being sarcastic. Instead of asking whether or not the landmark names are relevant, or why they might ... |
Dec 19, 2008 - 2:45:55 am UTC |
| Re: Re: Re: landmark name |
qinhaotian |
Because you have to sort the landmark names in an increasing order... The starting point is always the one with the lowest alphabetic value duh! |
Dec 19, 2008 - 12:12:48 am UTC |
| Re: Re: landmark name |
seyonv |
for real? or are you being sarcastic?? thanks anyways Jacob, for real. Why is it important if it really is? |
Dec 19, 2008 - 12:10:00 am UTC |
| Re: landmark name |
bleung91 |
you input them and nothing else. That doesn't qualify as "using" them. |
Dec 13, 2008 - 5:01:28 am UTC |
| landmark name |
zerglingrush |
What are you talking about Bosco, stop trying to trick Seyon. There's no way you could solve this problem without using the names. |
Dec 13, 2008 - 4:14:34 am UTC |
| Re: landmark name |
SourSpinach |
It's clearly vital to the problem. |
Dec 13, 2008 - 4:03:40 am UTC |
| landmark name |
seyonv |
Why do we need to know the names of the landmarks? |
Dec 13, 2008 - 2:51:21 am UTC |
| Re: Re: Dumb floating-point inaccuracies |
bleung91 |
woudln't that be really annoying to do? |
Dec 12, 2008 - 12:16:13 am UTC |
| Re: 4th test case |
taimla101 |
took me ages to get it |
Dec 11, 2008 - 3:23:56 am UTC |
| Re: Dumb floating-point inaccuracies |
hansonw1 |
Yes, this is why it's worth 10 points Floating point inaccuracies can be very tricky. One surefire way out, though, is to just use integers for everything. |
Dec 11, 2008 - 3:22:20 am UTC |
