Comments on: Euler Problem 89 http://www.dailydoseofexcel.com/archives/2009/01/10/euler-problem-89/ Daily posts of Excel tips…and other stuff Wed, 08 Feb 2012 23:58:05 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: Michael http://www.dailydoseofexcel.com/archives/2009/01/10/euler-problem-89/#comment-37077 Michael Mon, 12 Jan 2009 17:03:00 +0000 http://www.dailydoseofexcel.com/?p=1940#comment-37077 <p>Hans -</p> <p>Yep. Reading the comments, there is at least one person who solved it in MSWord. He opened the file, looked at the Statistics property for a character count, made the replacements, and got a new character count.</p> <p>He told Euler the difference. Now I don't give that guy any points for elegance. He's the wiseguy I used to sit behind... ;-)</p> <p>...mrt</p> Hans -

Yep. Reading the comments, there is at least one person who solved it in MSWord. He opened the file, looked at the Statistics property for a character count, made the replacements, and got a new character count.

He told Euler the difference. Now I don’t give that guy any points for elegance. He’s the wiseguy I used to sit behind… ;-)

…mrt

]]> By: Hans Schraven http://www.dailydoseofexcel.com/archives/2009/01/10/euler-problem-89/#comment-37072 Hans Schraven Mon, 12 Jan 2009 13:55:00 +0000 http://www.dailydoseofexcel.com/?p=1940#comment-37072 <p>There are only 6 possibilities to shorten Roman numerals.<br> As the file roman.txt contains 1 textstring it can be treated as such.</p> <div style="overflow: auto; white-space: nowrap;" class="codecolorer-container vb default"><div style="white-space: nowrap;" class="vb codecolorer"><span class="kw1">Sub</span> Euler89()<br>   <span class="kw1">Dim</span> x <span class="kw1">As</span> <span class="kw1">Long</span>, T <span class="kw1">As</span> <span class="kw1">Long</span>, c0 <span class="kw1">As</span> <span class="kw1">String</span><br>     <br>   T = Timer<br>   <span class="kw1">Open</span> <span class="st0">"E:OF oman.txt"</span> <span class="kw1">For</span> <span class="kw1">Input</span> <span class="kw1">As</span> #1<br>     c0 = <span class="kw1">Input</span>(LOF(1), #1)<br>     x = LOF(1) - Len(Replace(Replace(Replace(Replace(Replace(Replace(c0, <span class="st0">"VIIII"</span>, <span class="st0">"IX"</span>), <span class="st0">"IIII"</span>, <span class="st0">"IV"</span>), <span class="st0">"LXXXX"</span>, <span class="st0">"XC"</span>), <span class="st0">"XXXX"</span>, <span class="st0">"XL"</span>), <span class="st0">"DCCCC"</span>, <span class="st0">"CM"</span>), <span class="st0">"CCCC"</span>, <span class="st0">"CD"</span>))<br>   <span class="kw1">Close</span> #1<br>   Debug.<span class="kw1">Print</span> <span class="st0">"Result:  "</span> & x & <span class="st0">"   Time:  "</span> & Timer - T<br> <span class="kw1">End</span> <span class="kw1">Sub</span></div></div> There are only 6 possibilities to shorten Roman numerals.
As the file roman.txt contains 1 textstring it can be treated as such.

Sub Euler89()
  Dim x As Long, T As Long, c0 As String
   
  T = Timer
  Open “E:OF
oman.txt” For Input As #1
    c0 = Input(LOF(1), #1)
    x = LOF(1) – Len(Replace(Replace(Replace(Replace(Replace(Replace(c0, “VIIII”, “IX”), “IIII”, “IV”), “LXXXX”, “XC”), “XXXX”, “XL”), “DCCCC”, “CM”), “CCCC”, “CD”))
  Close #1
  Debug.Print “Result:  ” &amp; x &amp; ”   Time:  ” &amp; Timer – T
End Sub
]]> By: Hans Schraven http://www.dailydoseofexcel.com/archives/2009/01/10/euler-problem-89/#comment-37061 Hans Schraven Sun, 11 Jan 2009 20:38:00 +0000 http://www.dailydoseofexcel.com/?p=1940#comment-37061 <p>If speed and elegance do matter:</p> <div style="overflow: auto; white-space: nowrap;" class="codecolorer-container vb default"><div style="white-space: nowrap;" class="vb codecolorer">  <span class="kw1">Open</span> text <span class="kw1">For</span> <span class="kw1">Input</span> <span class="kw1">As</span> #1 <br>   Romans=split(<span class="kw1">Input</span>(LOF(1)),#1),vbcr & chr(10))<br>   <span class="kw1">Close</span> #1</div></div> If speed and elegance do matter:

  Open text For Input As #1
  Romans=split(Input(LOF(1)),#1),vbcr &amp; chr(10))
  Close #1
]]> By: Debra Dalgleish http://www.dailydoseofexcel.com/archives/2009/01/10/euler-problem-89/#comment-37056 Debra Dalgleish Sun, 11 Jan 2009 15:01:00 +0000 http://www.dailydoseofexcel.com/?p=1940#comment-37056 <p>When I mentioned the 3999 limit in an article on the ROMAN function, Tim Mayes commented "According to Wikipedia, large numbers (4000 and above) are usually written with a line on top to indicate multiplication by 1000. I guess it was easier to just cut it off at 3999 than to try to implement that."</p> <p><a href="http://blog.contextures.com/archives/2008/12/02/be-a-roman/#comments" rel="nofollow">http://blog.contextures.com/archives/2008/12/02/be-a-roman/#comments</a></p> When I mentioned the 3999 limit in an article on the ROMAN function, Tim Mayes commented “According to Wikipedia, large numbers (4000 and above) are usually written with a line on top to indicate multiplication by 1000. I guess it was easier to just cut it off at 3999 than to try to implement that.”

http://blog.contextures.com/archives/2008/12/02/be-a-roman/#comments

]]> By: Doug Jenkins http://www.dailydoseofexcel.com/archives/2009/01/10/euler-problem-89/#comment-37051 Doug Jenkins Sun, 11 Jan 2009 04:08:00 +0000 http://www.dailydoseofexcel.com/?p=1940#comment-37051 <p>"but it breaks a some ridiculously low number like 3999?</p> <p>This seems to be a Microsoft policy. Numerous Excel functions (factorial and decimal to binary spring to mind) fail to work at a ridiculously low number.</p> <p>Since it is easy to write these things so they would work at a much higher number I conclude that there must be some Microsoft policy to cripple a proportion of the lesser used functions.</p> <p>Why would they do that though?</p> <p>So they have something to upgrade in the next release?</p> “but it breaks a some ridiculously low number like 3999?

This seems to be a Microsoft policy. Numerous Excel functions (factorial and decimal to binary spring to mind) fail to work at a ridiculously low number.

Since it is easy to write these things so they would work at a much higher number I conclude that there must be some Microsoft policy to cripple a proportion of the lesser used functions.

Why would they do that though?

So they have something to upgrade in the next release?

]]>