Sigmaze! -- Second Attempt.

[zzzaaahhh]

Yay, the board is working!

Kudos to sang-drax, for working SMART as opposed to hard! Congrats.

quzah, C++ vs C actually did make a little difference in shaving some characters off:
1) for each of your 3 includes, use

#include<c*>

instead of

#include <*.h>

which will save 6 characters (3 spaces, 3 characters)

2) replace the two-line X and Y #define directives (26 chars) with a single line const
declaration

const int Y=11,X=23;

(20 chars).

That's 12 characters trimmed. One of the rare instances in which C++ is not biggified compared to C!!

Also, I have a question about your two macros:

#define A _[y][x]
#define C(D,E,F,G,H)if(D&&_[E][F]){A|=G;_[E][F]|=H;}else

Is that "A" in the second line supposed to be substituted from the first line? I didn't know you could do that (macros within macros). Is that standard, or implementation dependent?

[PJYelton]

Congrats zzzaaahhh, great looking code!

Quzah, did you post all of the entries you recieved? Can't tell if you are still writing results or not and I'd be curious to see how mine fared even though I know I didn't come close to winning.

[Sang-drax]

zzzaaahhh, if you use the cstdlib header instead of stdlib.h, the names in the header will reside in the std namespace. If you use the C++ versions of the C headers, you'll have to access the names with std:: or use 'using namespace std;'.

[zzzaaahhh]

zzzaaahhh, if you use the cstdlib header instead of stdlib.h, the names in the header will reside in the std namespace. If you use the C++ versions of the C headers, you'll have to access the names with std:: or use 'using namespace std;'.

Didn't know that. I've experienced that with C++ names like cout or cin, but the GNU compiler has always let me use things out of <clibrary> (corresponding to <library.h>) without specifying the namespace. e.g., I used printf, srand, and time from <cstdio>, <cstdlib>, and <ctime> without specifying 'std::', and it compiled without even a warning, even with the -ansi and -pedantic flags.

But if that's nonstandard, then it just goes to show that C++ really is biggified compared to C!

[quzah]

Also, I have a question about your two macros:

#define A _[y][x]
#define C(D,E,F,G,H)if(D&&_[E][F]){A|=G;_[E][F]|=H;}else

Is that "A" in the second line supposed to be substituted from the first line? I didn't know you could do that (macros within macros). Is that standard, or implementation dependent?

Yes and yes, it's standard. You can even have macros with the name of the macro appearing in the macro itself. However, some old compilers may not like it and try to continually expand it. So that's generally avoided.

Quzah, did you post all of the entries you recieved? Can't tell if you are still writing results or not and I'd be curious to see how mine fared even though I know I didn't come close to winning.

I wasn't sure if you wanted it entered. Here it is:

:~/programming/maze$ ls -al pjyelton.cpp
-rwxrwxr-x 1 root windows 556 Oct 12 19:06 pjyelton.cpp

As is, the output was:

*****************************************
*.*.....................*.....*.........*
*.*.*****************.*.*.*****.*******.*
*.*...*.............*.*...*.....*.....*.*
*.***.*.***********.*.*****.*****.***.*.*
*.*...*.......*.*...*.....*.*.*.....*.*.*
*.*.*********.*.*.*******.*.*.*.*****.*.*
*.*.........*...*.*.....*.*.*...*.....*.*
*.*********.*.***.*.***.*.*.*.***.***.*.*
*.*.....*...*.*...*...*...*.*...*...*.*.*
*.*****.*.***.*.*****.*****.*******.*.*.*
*.*.....*...*.*...*...*.....*.......*.*.*
*.*.*******.*.***.*.***.*****.*********.*
*.*.......*.*.*.*.*.*...*.....*.......*.*
*.***.***.*.*.*.*.*.*.***.*****.*****.*.*
*...*.*...*.*.*.*.*...*...*.....*.......*
***.***.***.*.*.*.*****.***.***********.*
*...*...*...*...*.*.......*...*.......*.*
*.***.***.*****.*.*.*****.***.*.*****.***
*.*...........*.*.......*...*.*.*...*...*
*.***********.*********.*.*.*.*.*.*****.*
*.......*.....*.......*.*.*.*...*.....*.*
*******.***.***.*****.***.*.*****.***.*.*
*.....*...*.*.......*.....*.*.....*...*.*
*.***.***.*.*******.*******.*.*****.***.*
*.*.*.....*...*.....*...*...*.*...*...*.*
*.*.*********.*.*****.*.***.*.*.*.***.*.*
*.....*.....*.*.......*...*.*...*...*.*.*
*****.*.*.*.*.*.*********.*.*****.***.*.*
*.....*.*.*.*.*...*.....*.*...*...*...*.*
*.*****.*.***.***.*.***.*.***.*.***.***.*
*.*...*.*.*...*...*...*.*...*.*.*...*...*
*.*.***.*.*.*****.*****.***.*.*.*.***.***
*.*.....*...*...*.*...*...*.*.*.*...*...*
*.***.*******.*.*.*.*.*.***.*.*****.***.*
*...*.........*.*...*...*...*.......*.*.*
***.*.*********.*********.*.*******.*.*.*
*.*.*.*.....*.............*.*...*.....*.*
*.*.***.***.*****************.*.*******.*
*.......*.....................*.........*
*****************************************

It also meets the requirements as far as resizability and the like. The code itself is:

#include<iostream>
#include<time.h>
#define X 20
#define Y 20
#define c std::cout<<
#define i int
#define M m[x][y]
#define U m[x+e[v][0]][y+e[v][1]]
#define u x+e[v][0],y+e[v][1]
#define v z%4
#define f(o,p) for(o=0;o<p;o++)
char m[X][Y]={0};bool w(i x,i y){return(x<0||y<0||y==Y||x==X);}i e[4][2]={{0,-1},{-1,0},{0,1},{1,0}};void R(i x,i y){i z=rand()%4;i q;f(q,4){z++;if(!w(u)&&!U){M|=1<<v;U|=1<<(v+2)%4;R(u);}}}i main(){srand(time(0));i x,y;R(0,0);c"*";f(x,X)c"**";c"\n";f(y,Y){f(x,X)(M&2)?c"..":c"*.";c"*\n";f(x,X)(M&4)?c"*.":c"**";c"*\n";}return 0;}

Pointwise, we'd end up with:

1000 - (56 * 10) = 440 points.

However, that one huge line of code would anger everyone if you did manage to fit it in your sig.

Quzah.

[PJYelton]

Heh, thanks

Not sure why it came out on one line like that, it didn't appear like that to me.

[quzah]

Well, the only reason I mention the line length, is because apparently everyone hated my 300 line sig I had. So I assumed they'd hate that too.

Quzah.

[xErath]

You don't need bool, use 'i' (int)... 3 bytes spared. Is srand(time(0)); really necessary to be called?? You don't need to add i in the declaration of main, because most compilers, which include the ones we use, use int as default return type, me thinks. And you have at the end return 0;. Ok, is good practice, but not 100% necessary... I think the point where is to squeze the code.

[quzah]

The code in question was to compile without warnings. That was part of the requirement. Furthermore, since the maze to be generated was supposed to be random, yes, seeding rand was also necessary.

Quzah.

[xErath]

but I'll guess you'll agree with this one
You have
#define f(o,p) for(o=0;o<p;o++)
Put instead
#define f(p) for(i o=0;o<p;o++)
So you don't need to declare any vars for the cicle.

Look here:
return x<0||y<0||y==Y||x==X;
No parenthesis, 1 byte spared.

Here's another stuff
http://www.cppreference.com/operator_precedence.html
So
(M & 2) ? c".." : c"*.";
(M & 4) ? c"*." : c"**";
become
M&2 ? c".." : c"*.";
M&4 ? c"*." : c"**";
No parenthesis, 4 bytes spared.

[quzah]

I'll agree that they actually made an entry. I didn't see yours any place.

Quzah.

[PJYelton]

Well said Quzah

Hell, considering I'd never written code like this before, I'm pretty proud I got to within 56 bytes even if I could have shaved an extra couple here and there.

[xErath]

I'm not compeeting, nor have time.. I have lots of homework to do.. bah!