Intuitive clear solution for Integer Palindrome by dig - python coding challenges

Enable Javascript in your browser and then refresh this page, for a much enhanced experience.

Intuitive solution in Clear category for Integer Palindrome by dig

def int_palindrome(number: int, B: int) -> bool:
    # your code here
    residus=[]
    quo=1000
    while quo!=0:
        quo= number//B
        res= number%B
        number=quo
        residus.append(res)
        
        
    a=residus.copy()
    a.reverse()
    
    return residus == a


print("Example:")
print(int_palindrome(455, 2))

# These "asserts" are used for self-checking
assert int_palindrome(6, 2) == False
assert int_palindrome(34, 2) == False
assert int_palindrome(455, 2) == True

print("The mission is done! Click 'Check Solution' to earn rewards!")

Feb. 11, 2023

Comments:

CDG.Axel on March 21, 2023, 3:26 p.m.
Great idea of integer list using! Most of guys converted it to string with plenty redundant code. Btw, some optimization ideas: <pre class='brush: python'>quo=1000 while quo!=0: quo= number//B res= number%B number=quo residus.append(res) --> while number > 0: number, n = divmod(number, B) residus.append(n) </pre> And another list looks redundant: <pre class='brush: python'>a=residus.copy() a.reverse() return residus == a --> return residus == residus[::-1] </pre>

dig on March 21, 2023, 3:34 p.m.
I made a mess doing residus.reverse() == residus because I did not realize that change instantanially "residus" so I finished doing a copy (a). But yeahh, you are right, this problem does not appear with [::-1] thanks for the dividmod, it is very useful :)

CDG.Axel on March 21, 2023, 3:51 p.m.
Guess you try to use reversed(). But comparison residus == reversed(residus) will not work, because of reversed returns the iterator, not list. You can avoid it this way: <pre class='brush: python'>residus == list(reversed(residus)) </pre> PS: sometimes reversed is very useful for cycles, because it doesn't produce list like the slices. <pre class='brush: python'>a, s = [1, 2, 3, 2, 1] * 1000000, 0 for e in reversed(a): s += e --> Time: 0.15212 seconds a, s = [1, 2, 3, 2, 1] * 1000000, 0 for e in a[::-1]: s += e --> Time: 0.16754 seconds </pre>

dig on March 21, 2023, 4 p.m.
do you think the difference is appreciable? And yess, I tried reversed but did not know it was an iterator. Now I know wich was the problem :)

CDG.Axel on March 21, 2023, 4:50 p.m.
In this case no, but sometimes it can be significant. Next is my opinion, not a rules: <ul> <li>'a[::-1]' is shorter, but code with 'reversed(a)' is clearer</li> <li>but 'list(reversed(a))' looks too heavy in opposite to 'a[::-1]' if you need a list.</li> </ul>

dig on March 21, 2023, 4:55 p.m.
thanks for your opinion, seems to be very reasonable :)

Pavellver on March 22, 2023, 1:18 p.m.
thanks for that

List, list and list again

0 %

You ClassRoom Demo is Ready With the new tool CheckiO ClassRoom, you will be able to analyze your students' progress, have your own leaderboard, change missions order on the map, and so on.