Code Golf: Parenthesis
Our previous code golf ended with an overwhelming win, so now it's time for another one.
Parenthesis Hell is a Lisp-like esoteric programming language(esolang).
As a Lisp-like language, the code consists only of nested matched pairs of opened and closed parenthesis.
Your task is to write a method that receives a string of parenthesis and returns 1 if the order of the parenthesis is valid. For example, the string of parenthesis (())() is valid because it contains a matched pair of opened and closed parenthesis at each position. The string ()((()))) is not valid because it contains one unmatched parenthesis.
Input
"(()()())"
Output
1
Note
- Characters other than parentheses
)(must be ignored, such as braces{}, brackets[], chevrons<>, etc. - Use this code to check the solution length
Rules
The signature of the contest entry MUST be:
Class codeGolf.ParenthesisHell { ClassMethod IsValid(s As %String) As %Boolean { // Your solution here } }It is forbidden to modify class/signature, including but not limited to:
- Adding inheritance
- Setting default argument values
- Adding class elements (Parameters, Methods, Includes, etc).
It is forbidden to refer to non-system code from your entry. For example, this is not a valid entry:
ClassMethod Build(f As %Integer) { W ##class(myPackage.myClass).test(a) }The use of
$ZWPACKand$ZWBPACKis also discouraged.You can use this test case:
Class codeGolf.unittests.ParenthesisHell Extends %UnitTest.TestCase { Method TestValid() { Do $$$AssertEquals(##class(codeGolf.ParenthesisHell).IsValid("()"), $$$YES) Do $$$AssertEquals(##class(codeGolf.ParenthesisHell).IsValid("(()())"), $$$YES) Do $$$AssertEquals(##class(codeGolf.ParenthesisHell).IsValid("(((())))"), $$$YES) Do $$$AssertEquals(##class(codeGolf.ParenthesisHell).IsValid("()(())((()))(())()"), $$$YES) Do $$$AssertEquals(##class(codeGolf.ParenthesisHell).IsValid("(]{)"), $$$YES) Do $$$AssertEquals(##class(codeGolf.ParenthesisHell).IsValid("(()()(()()(()()()()((()()(()(()((()((()()()((()((()()()((()((((()()(()()()()()()(((()(((()((()((((()(((()()(()()((()((()()()((()()(()()()()(()()()()(()()()()(()(())))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))"), $$$YES) } Method TestInValid() { Do $$$AssertEquals(##class(codeGolf.ParenthesisHell).IsValid("(]"), $$$NO) Do $$$AssertEquals(##class(codeGolf.ParenthesisHell).IsValid("()(()(()))(()()"), $$$NO) Do $$$AssertEquals(##class(codeGolf.ParenthesisHell).IsValid(")("), $$$NO) Do $$$AssertEquals(##class(codeGolf.ParenthesisHell).IsValid("()()("), $$$NO) Do $$$AssertEquals(##class(codeGolf.ParenthesisHell).IsValid("((())"), $$$NO) Do $$$AssertEquals(##class(codeGolf.ParenthesisHell).IsValid("())(()"), $$$NO) Do $$$AssertEquals(##class(codeGolf.ParenthesisHell).IsValid(")()"), $$$NO) Do $$$AssertEquals(##class(codeGolf.ParenthesisHell).IsValid(")"), $$$NO) Do $$$AssertEquals(##class(codeGolf.ParenthesisHell).IsValid("(()()(()()(()()()()((()()(()(()((()((()()()((()((()()()((()((((()()(()()()()()()(((()(((()((()((((()(((()()(()()((()((()()()((()()(()()()()(()()()()(()()()()(()(()))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))"), $$$NO) } }
Comments
Python
ClassMethod IsValid(wAs%String) As%Boolean [ Language = python ]
{
import re;p=r'\([^()]*\)'while re.search(p,w):w=re.sub(p,'',w)
return len(w)==0
}
I'd argue this breaks rule #2 by switching language (it says "including but not limited to").
I just offer an alternative, how to make it with Python
You can make it even easier:
<FONT COLOR="#000080">ClassMethod </FONT><FONT COLOR="#000000">IsValid(</FONT><FONT COLOR="#ff00ff">s </FONT><FONT COLOR="#000080">As %String</FONT><FONT COLOR="#000000">) </FONT><FONT COLOR="#000080">As %Boolean </FONT><FONT COLOR="#000000">[ </FONT><FONT COLOR="#000080">Language </FONT><FONT COLOR="#000000">= python ]
{
</FONT><FONT COLOR="#800080">import</FONT><FONT COLOR="#0000ff"> regex</FONT><FONT COLOR="#000000">;</FONT><FONT COLOR="#800080">return</FONT><FONT COLOR="#0000ff"> regex</FONT><FONT COLOR="#000000">.</FONT><FONT COLOR="#0000ff">match</FONT><FONT COLOR="#000000">(</FONT><FONT COLOR="#008000">"^((?>[^()]|((?1)))*)$"</FONT><FONT COLOR="#000000">,</FONT><FONT COLOR="#0000ff">s</FONT><FONT COLOR="#000000">)</FONT><FONT COLOR="#ff00ff"> is not None
</FONT><FONT COLOR="#000000">}</FONT>Unfortunately, RegExp ICU does not support recursive patterns, otherwise it would be possible to write
q $match(s,"^((?>[^()]|\((?1)\))*)$")
Yeah, this module regexp, supports recursive, but it's not out of the box solution, and requires to be installed first, unfortunately
Class codeGolf.ParenthesisHell { ClassMethod IsValid(s As %String) As %Boolean
{
f{s t=s,s=$replace(s,"()","") ret:t=s s=""}
}
ClassMethod IsValid(s As %String) As %Boolean{ // Floats around them no good characters
s s=$ZSTRIP(s,"*E","","()")
// Erupts Combination jabs "(" followed by ")"
// Relentless follow up until stringy looks unbalanced
f {q:s'[("()") s s=$Replace(s,"()","")}
// Swings for the knock out
q s=""}Looks a bit like mine :)
ClassMethod IsValid(sAs%String) As%Boolean
{
f i=1:1:2E6 {
ss=$REPLACE($ZSTRIP(s,"*E",,"()"),"()","")
}
qs=""
}Since length was more important than speed I put the $ZSTRIP in the loop, and make it run 2M times (3.6M MAXLEN, that should be enough 😂
Sorry I meant to post this under the solution of @Alex Woodhead
OK, I start with 47 chars... unfortunately, I have to add 20 chars more for that (stupid) extra requirement of ignoring characters like {, [, <, etc. therefore end up with 67 chars
ClassMethod IsHalfValid(x)
{
1s z=x,x=$replace(x,"()","") g 1:x'=z qx=""
}
ClassMethod IsFullValid(x)
{
1s z=x,x=$replace($zstrip(x,"*e",,"()"),"()","") g 1:x'=z qx=""
}Speed was'n asked...
OK, one can short down those 20 bytes into 17 and we end up with 64 bytes.
ClassMethod IsValid(x)
{
1s z=x,x=$replace($tr(x,$tr(x,"()")),"()","") g 1:x'=z qx=""
}Again, speed wasn't asked
61 bytes. Could an AI machine ever beat a human at code golf? Don't they just use brute force?
ClassMethod IsValid(x)
{
f{s z=x,x=$replace($tr(x,$tr(x,"()")),"()",9) ret:x=z x=""}
}
It seems, that will be hard to underbid... Congratulations!
It's strange, according to approved method of calculating the length of the solution, your code shows a length of 62, not 61. Have you measured the length of your solution using this method?
You are correct. implementation.size sees $c(13,10) as the end of line character. I counted manually and added 1, not 2.
most of the solutions don't cater for the ")(" case being not valid
here is mine size 92
ClassMethod IsValid(sAs%String) As%Boolean
{
sr=1 f {s c=$e(s,$i(i)) q:c="" d:c="("$i(r) d:c=")"$i(r,-1) q:r<1} ret $s(r=1:1,1:0)
}size = 61
ClassMethod IsValid(s As %String) As %Boolean
{
q +##class(%iFind.Utils).TestSearchString($$$URLENCODE(s))
}your 2nd solution shows )((()) as valid which is not true
Thanks for the comment. I tested only on the provided data. The second option requires improvement.
size = 72
ClassMethod IsValid(s As %String) As %Boolean
{
q $l(s,"(")=$l(s,")")&($f(s,"(")<$f(s,")"))&($f(s,")(")-$f(s,"()")<2)
}size = 69
ClassMethod IsValid(s As %String) As %Boolean
{
1 s c=$i(c,$case($e(s,$i(i)),"(":1,")":-1,"":-2,:0)) q:c<0 c=-2 g 1
}Nice logic!
//57?
ClassMethod IsValid(s As %String) As %Boolean {
q +$$zTestSearchString^%iFind.Utils.1($$$URLENCODE(s))
}
No.
This code will not work in IRIS 2023.1 because changes have been made for security reasons: Improvements to how IRIS classes are generated and called
That article is an interesting read for anyone who has written code that goes directly to the generated INT code. I will need to re-think some of my older code that finds lines of code from $ZE and then displays and diagnoses the source of errors based on the variable names it finds there. I might also have to start using a mainstream debugger.
Another solution, 82 bytes:
/// ( -> -0.5/// ) -> 0.5ClassMethod IsValid(sAs%String) As%Boolean
{
s z=0,s=$zstrip(s,"*E",,"()") f s c=$a(s,$i(i)) ret:c<0 'z ret:$i(z,c-40.5)>00
}Variant 69 bytes:
ClassMethod IsValid(sAs%String) As%Boolean
{
1s c=$a(s,$i(i)) q:c<0 '$g(z) g:"()"'[$c(c) 1q:$i(z,c-40.5)>00 g 1
}If my aging brain me do not misleads, you could save two more bytes
g:"()"'[$c(c) // instead of this (13 bytes)
g:c=41-c+40// use this (11 bytes)Well done! Don't worry about your brain 😉
; 67 bytes improvement by Julius Kavay1s c=$a(s,$i(i)) q:c<0 '$g(z) g:c=41-c+401q:$i(z,c-40.5)>00 g 1ClassMethod IsValid(sAs%String) As%Boolean
{
f{s a=s,s=$change($zstrip(s,"*E",,"()"),"()",1) ret:a=ss=""}
}Ah yes, $Change can save a character on $Replace. And nested $TR saves on $zstrip.
f{s z=x,x=$change($tr(x,$tr(x,"()")),"()",9) ret:x=z x=""}
I just saw your nested $TR approach in an earlier comment. Very creative, I liked it! I guess together we made it to 61ch?
Team effort. Credit where it is due, @Julius Kavay introduced the nested $TR, I changed his "" to a single character that didn't need a quote.
After I put all the solutions in a pot, salting them with some own ideas then filtering, I got a really nice solution with 55 bytes. Works for all the examples given by @Eduard.Lebedyuk.
The best idea-donors where, among others, @Stuart Strickland and @Lorenzo Scalese, thank you.
ClassMethod IsValid(s)
{
f{s c=$a(s_0,$i(i))+1 ret:$i(z,c=42-(c=41))>0!'c 'z}
}Wonderful!
Your contribution is included too...
I just saw now, I published the next to last version instead of the last... sorry. I end up 53 bytes. This "s_0" was a work-around for not to use $g(z) by getting at least one loop for case, someone calls the method with an empty string
ClassMethod IsValid(s)
{
f{s c=$a(s,$i(i))+1 ret:$i(z,c=42-(c=41))>0!'c 'z}
}
size = 52
ClassMethod IsValid(s As %String) As %Boolean
{
1 s c=$a(s,$i(i))+1 g:1-$i(z,c=42-(c=41))&c 1 q 'z
}Very nice.
I'm late to the party, but it looks like several had similar approaches.
60
ClassMethod IsValid(sAs%String) As%Boolean
{
f{sx="()",s=$CHANGE($TR(s,$TR(s,x)),x,"") q:s'[x} qs=""
}