# Thread: Contest - Snake Numbers

1. Think you can elaborate on the time judging, like what's too long?

2. The time will be judged compared to other entries. The fastest entry for a particular challenge will be awarded with a 10; the other entries will be awarded with a score proportional to the additional amount of time it takes.

For example, your entry takes 4 minutes to find a solution for a particular challenge, but the best entry only took 2 minutes. Your entry would be awarded with a 5 for that challenge.

I'm debating whether or not to weight the time that heavily. Opinions? How would you want your program judged?

3. Originally Posted by pianorain
The time will be judged compared to other entries. The fastest entry for a particular challenge will be awarded with a 10; the other entries will be awarded with a score proportional to the additional amount of time it takes.

For example, your entry takes 4 minutes to find a solution for a particular challenge, but the best entry only took 2 minutes. Your entry would be awarded with a 5 for that challenge.

I'm debating whether or not to weight the time that heavily. Opinions? How would you want your program judged?
I think the time and squares uncovered should be tied together, becaue 1 entry may find a simple solution in seconds where another may find a more complete solution but take 2 minutes. Timewise how do you judge one against the other?

You might try doing a ratio squares/sec or something to that sort

5. I agree with Darryl. The game you gave a link to gave both the score and the number of boxes which were eaten. But I guess if you can eat all the boxes, the overall score becomes rather redundant doesn't it.

Also, I think there should possibly be some method of insuring that everyone's game area has the same number (roughly at least), of numbers ... I mean 18*18 sure, but the values of the cells is what I mean. If someone had a box full of 6's, they would be rather more likely to get a higher score than if they didn't. That is if the idea started by Darryl is implemented. But the tough choice is how to judge the score if both are to be taken into account.

Just by doing a quick test, it gives the score by: summing up the number of every box you eat, and multiplying the result by 10.

6. Originally Posted by Darryl
You might try doing a ratio squares/sec or something to that sort
This is a great idea. I'll do that.

II. Revised Code Judging
II.I Submitted code will be judged based on the following:

Compiliation (0 - 10)
How easy it is to compile. Warnings detract from this score.

Success x 5 (0.0 - 10.0)
Each entry will be given five boards to solve. This will be graded depending upon how well and how fast the code performs the desired task compared to the other entries.

Coding Style(0 - 10)
Code efficiency, is the code readable? Are good programming practices followed? (Are processes closed when finished, do you use arrays when initializing multiple variables under one instance, and do you free memory after allocation?)

Best Code Score: 70.0
Originally Posted by Quantum1024
Sure, but if you use any non-standard libraries, make sure to say that you do and include a location where I can get them.
Originally Posted by twomers
Also, I think there should possibly be some method of insuring that everyone's game area has the same number (roughly at least), of numbers
Everyone will get the same five challenge boards.

7. Ok I am done with my entry, just optimizing now...performance wise it will uncover about 175 squares in under 2 sec, if allowed to keep running it reaches around 210 in about 15 seconds and then improvements after that are slow, but I am still tweking it. So depending on the timing judging, it may be better for me to end at 2 secs. instead of holding out for the 15 seconds.

8. Originally Posted by Darryl
Ok I am done with my entry, just optimizing now...performance wise it will uncover about 175 squares in under 2 sec, if allowed to keep running it reaches around 210 in about 15 seconds and then improvements after that are slow, but I am still tweking it. So depending on the timing judging, it may be better for me to end at 2 secs. instead of holding out for the 15 seconds.
Oh Dear, I haven't even started it yet ...

9. woohoo, I beat the high score on ebaums page, with 7250. unfortunately it doesn't save it to the page. Anyway I am done and will email it tomorrow after I add a few more comments and maybe rename a few variables.

Good luck to the rest of you :-)

10. I'll enter, since I started to write code. Not sure how much of a chance I stand, but we'll find out, I suppose.

Darryl's doing a good job of making the competition nervous. ;-)

11. >> Darryl's doing a good job of making the competition nervous. ;-)
I bet it's all just show, bet he doesn't have anything done in it!

>> The best way to accelerate an IBM is at 9.8 m/s/s.
haha

12. Originally Posted by Cactus_Hugger
I'll enter, since I started to write code.
Sweet. I'm also writing some code, but I won't enter. That might be a bit of biased judging.

13. Originally Posted by twomers
>> Darryl's doing a good job of making the competition nervous. ;-)
I bet it's all just show, bet he doesn't have anything done in it!

>> The best way to accelerate an IBM is at 9.8 m/s/s.
haha
it's submitted, which pianorain can verify

14. I'm in.

15. Just a reminder, you've got about two weeks to submit an entry for this contest. So far, the only entry I've got is Darryl's.