## Problem 017

A place to air possible concerns or difficulties in understanding ProjectEuler problems. This forum is not meant to publish solutions. This forum is NOT meant to discuss solution methods or giving hints how a problem can be solved.
Forum rules
As your posts will be visible to the general public you
are requested to be thoughtful in not posting anything
that might explicitly give away how to solve a particular problem.

This forum is NOT meant to discuss solution methods for a problem.

In particular don't post any code fragments or results.

Don't start begging others to give partial answers to problems

Don't ask for hints how to solve a problem

Don't start a new topic for a problem if there already exists one

Don't post any spoilers
nicolas.patrois
Posts: 118
Joined: Fri Jul 26, 2013 4:54 pm
Contact:

### Re: Problem 017

meesterfly
Posts: 1
Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2014 6:24 pm

### Re: Problem 017

Hello I can't spell out numbers either \o/
jesduarte
Posts: 2
Joined: Fri Sep 12, 2014 4:38 pm

### Re: Problem 017

Unless I misunderstood something, the instructions for problem 17 are incorrect. It says:
If all the numbers from 1 to 1000 (one thousand) inclusive
My solution, which was accepted, does not include "one thousand". Hence, the instructions should not say "inclusive". I spent some time trying to figure out why my answer was not accepted and then it occurred to me that "one thousand" should probably be excluded since many other problems involved half-open intervals rather than closed intervals. Thanks.
Bubbler
Posts: 28
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2013 6:12 am

### Re: Problem 017

No, the question says the right thing. I get the correct answer only after adding 11("one thousand") at the end, so if your solution is accepted without counting it, you are actually getting a wrong answer which is off by 11.
jesduarte wrote:...since many other problems involved half-open intervals rather than closed intervals.
I would agree with this part, considering so many "under XXX" questions seen so far, but P17 is an odd case.
Dyscalculia
Posts: 5
Joined: Wed Aug 06, 2014 3:38 pm

### Re: Problem 017

Same, I've solved it and I included number 1000 in the count. So, there's an error in your code.
jesduarte
Posts: 2
Joined: Fri Sep 12, 2014 4:38 pm

### Re: Problem 017

Looks like I misspelled "forty" as "fourty" in some places. I can now verify that indeed "one thousand" is included. Though I already had the correct answer, it was a case of being rewarded for "bad" behavior.
joshstrange
Posts: 2
Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2015 8:09 pm

### Re: Problem 017

Ok, I'm going crazy here. I wrote my code in Javascript and I have the following spellings:

Code: Select all

		1: 'one',
2: 'two',
3: 'three',
4: 'four',
5: 'five',
6: 'six',
7: 'seven',
8: 'eight',
9: 'nine',
10: 'ten',
11: 'eleven',
12: 'twelve',
13: 'thirteen',
14: 'fourteen',
15: 'fifteen',
16: 'sixteen',
17: 'seventeen',
18: 'eighteen',
19: 'nineteen',
20: 'twenty',
30: 'thirty',
40: 'forty',
50: 'fifty',
60: 'sixty',
70: 'seventy',
80: 'eighty',
90: 'ninety',
1000: 'onethousand'

I can send my code to someone if they can look at it. I am off by 240 from the correct answer (I looked up the correct answer but haven't entered it yet). I've read every post here and checked the spelling multiple times but I can't seem to figure out what is going on. Every single number + length that people have posted I have had as well. I AM using "and" between the hundreds and the tens place. Any help would be much appreciated, thank you!
dawghaus4
Posts: 56
Joined: Fri Nov 29, 2013 2:22 am

### Re: Problem 017

Is your program's result high or low?

Have you had your program give you totals for small ranges of number (e.g. 198 to 203) for which you have hand counted the result.

Tom
joshstrange
Posts: 2
Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2015 8:09 pm

### Re: Problem 017

Ok, I feel like a moron. I had a friend at work look it over and notice that I was putting 'and' before number < 100 and > 19 so 'andtwentyone'.
AndreasDavour
Posts: 4
Joined: Fri Jul 17, 2015 9:54 am

### Re: Problem 017

Can someone British please clarify how they use "and"?

I know this have been beaten to death, but the problem formulation is not clear. I have no beef with British English, but the problem clearly is not "foreigner proof"

My solution is off by 27, which is a multiple of 3 and I suspect that mean I'm misusing "and".

Let me clarify my question. I print the numbers, and for all numbers above 100, I add 3 for the "and". Is that grammatically wrong?
jaap
Posts: 554
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2008 3:57 pm
Contact:

### Re: Problem 017

AndreasDavour wrote:Can someone British please clarify how they use "and"?

I know this have been beaten to death, but the problem formulation is not clear. I have no beef with British English, but the problem clearly is not "foreigner proof"

My solution is off by 27, which is a multiple of 3 and I suspect that mean I'm misusing "and".

Let me clarify my question. I print the numbers, and for all numbers above 100, I add 3 for the "and". Is that grammatically wrong?
Does 200 have an 'and' ?
AndreasDavour
Posts: 4
Joined: Fri Jul 17, 2015 9:54 am

### Re: Problem 017

Hmm. Looks like I did not take out the exception on the even hundreds, and added in "and" on those as well. Thanks for the heads up on that. Now I guess I have bigger problems as now my results differ by way more that it originally did.
AndreasDavour
Posts: 4
Joined: Fri Jul 17, 2015 9:54 am

### Re: Problem 017

I feel I need to discuss this more explicitly. Is there a assigned place where code snippets and such can be posted, as this is not the place?

My result differ from the correct I looked up by a measly three.
Georg
Posts: 157
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 7:00 am
Location: Mannheim, Germany
Contact:

### Re: Problem 017

AndreasDavour
Posts: 4
Joined: Fri Jul 17, 2015 9:54 am

### Re: Problem 017

The problem with that place it is only available once you have posted the correct solution...

Anyway. I took a less compact approach and got the correct number.
BlivetWidget
Posts: 3
Joined: Sun Mar 05, 2017 3:07 am

### Re: Problem 017

I would like to propose a small edit to the problem which I think may clarify it a bit. Currently the description only gives test cases which are ambiguous wrt counting "and". Allow me to demonstrate:

[*]342 (three hundred and forty-two) contains 23 letters if you count the "and" but not the spaces, and 23 letters (again) if you count the spaces but not the "and"
[*]115 (one hundred and fifteen) contains 20 letters if you count the "and" but not the spaces, and 20 letters (again) if you count the spaces but not the "and"
[*]Single-digit numbers have neither spaces nor "and"

So, the instructions are clear wrt not counting spaces, and you can tell the user to RTFM until the cows come home, but I think replacing 115 with, say, 100 will tighten up the instruction and head off some level of confusion for some users. Anyway, thanks for reading.
sjhillier
Posts: 558
Joined: Sun Aug 17, 2014 4:59 pm
Location: Birmingham, UK
Contact:

### Re: Problem 017

BlivetWidget wrote: Tue Mar 07, 2017 1:38 am I would like to propose a small edit to the problem which I think may clarify it a bit. Currently the description only gives test cases which are ambiguous wrt counting "and". Allow me to demonstrate:

...
Thanks, it's a good point, but given that this is now a rather old problem, and also more than 100,000 people have solved it in its current form, I'd be reluctant to make a change at this stage.
BlivetWidget
Posts: 3
Joined: Sun Mar 05, 2017 3:07 am

### Re: Problem 017

Understandable, but I think it's sometimes worth considering the new users who start at the beginning as I'm doing. And it's no change to the problem itself, just the note at the bottom. But it's up to you, I just saw an opportunity for clarity and wanted to point it out.
hk
Posts: 11040
Joined: Sun Mar 26, 2006 10:34 am
Location: Haren, Netherlands

### Re: Problem 017

In my opinion "Do not count spaces or hyphens." is clear enough and I fail to see why you nevertheless start counting them again.
BlivetWidget
Posts: 3
Joined: Sun Mar 05, 2017 3:07 am

### Re: Problem 017

In my opinion, my post was clear enough in explaining that the instructions were correct but had room for improvement. I stated this explicitly, yet you came away from it confused. This is a perfect analogy for the problem we're discussing

Please read my post again, and I think you'll see I'm only trying to suggest an improvement. If you can't see an improvement in using test cases which will only be passed by the correct code, well, I can't help you there.