## Search found 8 matches

- Tue Sep 26, 2017 1:58 pm
- Forum: News, Suggestions, and FAQ
- Topic: Errors/Warnings/Bugs
- Replies:
**557** - Views:
**138616**

### Re: Errors/Warnings/Bugs

I see. Thanks.

- Mon Sep 25, 2017 9:44 pm
- Forum: News, Suggestions, and FAQ
- Topic: Errors/Warnings/Bugs
- Replies:
**557** - Views:
**138616**

### Re: Errors/Warnings/Bugs

I had been away from PE for several months, and upon returning to the statistics for my country today ( Bulgaria ), I was surprised to find that I had dropped down way low in the rankings. I have a memory of being within the top 30 at some point, yet now I stand at number 81. I was very embarrassed ...

- Sun Jun 05, 2016 2:57 am
- Forum: News, Suggestions, and FAQ
- Topic: Does/did anyone else hit a brick wall when getting to about 70-80 problems solved?
- Replies:
**8** - Views:
**4149**

### Does/did anyone else hit a brick wall when getting to about 70-80 problems solved?

I've completed problems 1 through 59, and from then on it's patches of solved problems, for a total of 78 solved problems. Now, I've tried and tried to gather at least one more solution, but I seem to have been stumped. I just can't go on, damn it! xD Mind you, this isn't a case of exhaustion or bei...

- Wed Feb 17, 2016 7:21 am
- Forum: Clarifications on Project Euler Problems
- Topic: Problem 061
- Replies:
**37** - Views:
**15427**

### Re: Problem 061

oooooooh, so that's what it was that prevented me from solving this problem for 12 hours! Way to go, Mr. Euler, your insufficient explanations stump me again!RishadanPort wrote: Does not need to be that the First is a square, the Second is a triangle, etc.

- Sun Feb 14, 2016 8:14 pm
- Forum: Clarifications on Project Euler Problems
- Topic: Problem 547
- Replies:
**3** - Views:
**2406**

### Re: Problem 547

Well, I got 1.6488, so apparently my method was incorrect altogether.

- Sun Feb 14, 2016 5:12 am
- Forum: Clarifications on Project Euler Problems
- Topic: Problem 547
- Replies:
**3** - Views:
**2406**

### Problem 547

Not relying on random sampling, but instead on a calculus-based generalised solution for rectangles, the default case of n=3 yields for me a S(3) of a very slightly lower value than the one given in the problem's description. Precision errors on my part are out of the question, due to my calculation...

- Thu Jan 14, 2016 5:22 pm
- Forum: Clarifications on Project Euler Problems
- Topic: Problem 435
- Replies:
**9** - Views:
**3850**

### Re: Problem 435

This problem totally throws the "one minute rule" out the window, as well as a bunch of other ones as well, such as how your PC only needs to be average at best.

I'm done with PE.

I'm done with PE.

- Tue Jan 12, 2016 3:31 pm
- Forum: Clarifications on Project Euler Problems
- Topic: Problem 051
- Replies:
**60** - Views:
**24335**

### Re: Needing clarification on problem 51

Though not explicitly mentioned, leading zeros are as usual not allowed in the numbers wow... I just wasted 4 hours after writing the code in 30 minutes, trying to figure out where my error is, when there was really no error at all, but that the problem is not worded well enough! Mr Euler, I implor...