Thanks to my sponsors: Sindre Johansen, Laine Taffin Altman, Ben Wishovich, qrpth, Elijah Voigt, Yufan Lou, Garret Kelly, Vincent, Alex Krantz, compwhizii, Michael Mrozek, Chris Walker, Guillaume Demonet, James Leitch, Adam Gutglick, Berkus Decker, Tiziano Santoro, thbkrshw, Blake Johnson, Jelle Besseling and 255 more
4 min
Day 13 (Advent of Code 2022)
👋 This page was last updated ~2 years ago. Just so you know.
The day 13 puzzle needs a speech therapist.
???
...because it has an awful lisp!! Ahhhahahahhhh
Are you ok? What is.. what is going on with you?
No but seriously we have what are ostensibly S-expressions, except they use JSON-adjacent notation:
[1,1,3,1,1]
[1,1,5,1,1]
[[1],[2,3,4]]
[[1],4]
[9]
[[8,7,6]]
[[4,4],4,4]
[[4,4],4,4,4]
[7,7,7,7]
[7,7,7]
[]
[3]
[[[]]]
[[]]
[1,[2,[3,[4,[5,6,7]]]],8,9]
[1,[2,[3,[4,[5,6,0]]]],8,9]
And you know the saying: if it looks like JSON, and it quacks like JSON, you can just use serde_json.
$ cargo add serde -F derive
(cut)
$ cargo add serde_json
use serde::Deserialize;
#[derive(Deserialize, Clone, PartialEq, Eq)]
#[serde(untagged)]
enum Node {
Number(u64),
List(Vec<Node>),
}
Let's add a nice Debug impl:
impl fmt::Debug for Node {
fn fmt(&self, f: &mut fmt::Formatter<'_>) -> fmt::Result {
match self {
Self::Number(n) => write!(f, "{n}"),
Self::List(n) => f.debug_list().entries(n).finish(),
}
}
}
Part 1
For Part 1, we need to sum the (1-based) indices of pairs of nodes that are in
the correct order (ie. l < r).
Comparing two values in Rust is just the PartialOrd trait (and its infallible sibling, the Ord trait).
Wait wha? Comparing values is fallible now?
Yeah, because IEEE 754. Some floating point numbers are... not numbers. And cannot be compared.
fn main() {
dbg!(f64::NAN > f64::NAN);
dbg!(f64::NAN < f64::NAN);
dbg!(f64::NAN == f64::NAN);
dbg!(f64::NAN.partial_cmp(&f64::NAN));
}
$ cargo run
Compiling playground v0.0.1 (/playground)
Finished dev [unoptimized + debuginfo] target(s) in 0.85s
Running `target/debug/playground`
[src/main.rs:2] f64::NAN > f64::NAN = false
[src/main.rs:3] f64::NAN < f64::NAN = false
[src/main.rs:4] f64::NAN == f64::NAN = false
[src/main.rs:5] f64::NAN.partial_cmp(&f64::NAN) = None
Anyway, the problem statement tells us how to compare "a list and a number", and it's to pretend that the number is a list of size 1, so, let's pretend:
impl Node {
fn with_slice<T>(&self, f: impl FnOnce(&[Node]) -> T) -> T {
match self {
Self::List(n) => f(&n[..]),
Self::Number(n) => f(&[Self::Number(*n)]),
}
}
}
This implementation is interesting: if we returned a Vec<T>, we wouldn't need
to take a closure. Returning a &[T] works for the Self::List arm, but not
for the Self::Number arm (try it!).
So, this is a common-ish pattern in Rust: just let the caller do whatever with borrowed locals, in a closure. This gets dicier with async (for now), but here it works beautifully.
Now we can implement PartialOrd and Ord:
impl std::cmp::PartialOrd for Node {
fn partial_cmp(&self, other: &Self) -> Option<std::cmp::Ordering> {
match (self, other) {
(Node::Number(a), Node::Number(b)) => a.partial_cmp(b),
(l, r) => Some(l.with_slice(|l| {
r.with_slice(|r| {
l.iter()
.zip(r.iter())
.map(|(aa, bb)| aa.cmp(bb))
// return the first ordering that isn't `Equal`
.find(|&ord| ord != Ordering::Equal)
// or compare the lengths
.unwrap_or_else(|| l.len().cmp(&r.len()))
})
})),
}
}
}
impl std::cmp::Ord for Node {
fn cmp(&self, other: &Self) -> Ordering {
self.partial_cmp(other).unwrap()
}
}
And then the part 1 solution simply becomes:
fn main() {
let mut sum = 0;
for (i, groups) in include_str!("sample-input.txt").split("\n\n").enumerate() {
let i = i + 1;
let mut nodes = groups
.lines()
.map(|line| serde_json::from_str::<Node>(line).unwrap());
let l = nodes.next().unwrap();
let r = nodes.next().unwrap();
println!("\n== Pair {i} ==");
println!("l = {l:?}");
println!("r = {r:?}");
println!("l < r = {}", l < r);
if l < r {
sum += i;
}
}
dbg!(sum);
}
You can golf that down with iterators, but I wanted the output to be somewhat verbose as I didn't want any bad surprises.
Simplifying the Ord implementation
As it turns out, the comparison described in the problem statement has the same
semantics as the comparison for slices (&[T] where T implements Ord),
so we can simplify our implementation to:
impl std::cmp::PartialOrd for Node {
fn partial_cmp(&self, other: &Self) -> Option<std::cmp::Ordering> {
match (self, other) {
(Node::Number(a), Node::Number(b)) => a.partial_cmp(b),
(l, r) => l.with_slice(|l| r.with_slice(|r| l.partial_cmp(r))),
}
}
}
Thanks to korrat on GitHub, DelinquentFlower on Reddit, and many others for the suggestion.
Part 2
In part 2, we need to sort all inputs plus two "divider packets", [2], and
[6], and multiply the (1-based) indices of those two divider packets, once
sorted.
Because sorting a slice of T where T: Ord is in the Rust standard library,
this is straightforward:
fn main() {
let dividers = vec![
Node::List(vec![Node::Number(2)]),
Node::List(vec![Node::Number(6)]),
];
let mut packets = include_str!("input.txt")
.lines()
.filter(|s| !s.is_empty())
.map(|line| serde_json::from_str::<Node>(line).unwrap())
.chain(dividers.iter().cloned())
.collect::<Vec<_>>();
packets.sort();
let decoder_key = dividers
.iter()
.map(|d| packets.binary_search(d).unwrap() + 1)
.product::<usize>();
dbg!(decoder_key);
}
Note that we're able to use binary_search rather than find because at that
point, packets is sorted.
We don't have to sort the packets, we can simply count the packets below each divider packet, thanks korrat on GitHub for the suggestion!
And voilà! Shortest Advent of Code article yet.
Here's another article just for you:
The bottom emoji breaks rust-analyzer
35 min
Some bugs are merely fun. Others are simply delicious!
Today's pick is the latter.
Reproducing the issue, part 1
(It may be tempting to skip that section, but reproducing an issue is an important part of figuring it out, so.)
I've never used Emacs before, so let's install it. I do most of my computing on an era-appropriate Ubuntu, today it's Ubuntu 22.10, so I just need to: