I have the following two code snippets in Scala:
/* Iterative */
for (i <- max to sum by min) {
if (sum % i == 0) validBusSize(i, L, 0)
}
/* Functional */
List.range(max, sum + 1, min)
.filter(sum % _ == 0)
.map(validBusSize(_, L, 0))
Both these code snippets are part of otherwise identical objects. However, when I run my code on Hackerrank, the object with the iterative snippet takes a maximum of 1.45 seconds, while the functional snippet causes the code to take > 7 seconds, which is a timeout.
I'd like to know if it's possible to rewrite the for loop functionally while retaining the speed. I took a look at the Stream
container, but again I'll have to call filter
before map
, instead of computing each validBusSize
sequentially.
Thanks!
Edit:
/* Full Code */
import scala.io.StdIn.readLine
object BusStation {
def main(args: Array[String]) {
readLine
val L = readLine.split(" ").map(_.toInt).toList
val min = L.min
val max = L.max
val sum = L.foldRight(0)(_ + _)
/* code under consideration */
for (i <- max to sum by min) {
if (sum % i == 0) validBusSize(i, L, 0)
}
}
def validBusSize(size: Int, L: List[Int], curr: Int) {
L match {
case Nil if (curr == size) => print(size + " ")
case head::tail if (curr < size) =>
validBusSize(size, tail, curr + head)
case head::tail if (curr == size) => validBusSize(size, tail, head)
case head::tail if (curr > size) => return
}
}
}
Right now, your best bet for fast functional code is tail-recursive functions:
@annotation.tailrec
def getBusSizes(i: Int, sum: Int, step: Int) {
if (i <= sum) {
if (sum % i == 0) validBusSize(i, L, 0)
getBusSizes(i + step, sum, step)
}
}
Various other things will be sort of fast-ish, but for something like this where there's mostly simple math, the overhead from the generic interface will be sizable. With a tail-recursive function you'll get a while loop underneath. (You don't need the annotation to make it tail-recursive; that just causes the compilation to fail if it can't. The optimization happens whether the annotation is there or not.)
So apparently the following worked:
Replacing the List.range(max, sum + 1, min)
with a Range object, (max to sum by min)
. Going to ask another questions about why this works though.
Consider converting the range into a parallel version with keyword par
, for instance like this
(max to sum by min).par
This may improve performance especially for large sized ranges with large values on calling validBusSize
.
Thus in the proposed for comprehension,
for ( i <- (max to sum by min).par ) {
if (sum % i == 0) validBusSize(i, L, 0)
}
The technical post webpages of this site follow the CC BY-SA 4.0 protocol. If you need to reprint, please indicate the site URL or the original address.Any question please contact:yoyou2525@163.com.