Roman numerals clear solution for Roman Numerals by xtprox - python coding challenges

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

Roman numerals solution in Clear category for Roman Numerals by xtprox

def checkio(data):
    op = data
    arabian = [1000,900,500,400,100,90,50,40,10,9,5,4,1]
    roman = ["M","CM","D","CD","C","XC","L","XL","X","IX","V","IV","I"]
    conv = ""
    for i in [1000,900,500,400,100,90,50,40,10,9,5,4,1]:
        if op >= i:
            conv += roman[arabian.index(i)] * (op / i)
            op -= i * (op / i)

    return conv

if __name__ == '__main__':
    #These "asserts" using only for self-checking and not necessary for auto-testing
    assert checkio(6) == 'VI', '6'
    assert checkio(76) == 'LXXVI', '76'
    assert checkio(499) == 'CDXCIX', '499'
    assert checkio(3888) == 'MMMDCCCLXXXVIII', '3888'

Aug. 11, 2016

Comments:

Kolrim on Sept. 29, 2016, 4:31 p.m.
Nicely done! I had a difficult time just getting my first solution to work at all. I eventually went with a dictionary for each of the places (so 4 dictionaries, one for the 1000s place, one for the 100s place, etc). Very cumbersome. I think your solution is rather elegant. One question, why did you rename the data variable passed to checkio() to 'op' instead of just using 'data'?

xtprox on Sept. 29, 2016, 5:27 p.m.
Hello and thank you for review! First of all, that's definitely a misstake (talking about op = data). I wanted to preserve original data variable contents so I created op variable. But I did it wrong. I've should use it in this way: op = data[:]. In my code I've just created another link to same 'data' called op, so initial values of data variable still will be changed. And another thing: <pre class='brush: python'>for i in [1000,900,500,400,100,90,50,40,10,9,5,4,1]: </pre> can be replaced as: <pre class='brush: python'> for i in arabian: </pre>

Kolrim on Sept. 29, 2016, 7:01 p.m.
Nice, I didn't even see that (for i in arabian:). Did you want to preserve the original data variable contents because you thought you would need the original again? Or is that just a personal preference to do so?

xtprox on Sept. 29, 2016, 8:53 p.m.
I think that you always should return some values that function calculates and preserve original data in variables that was passed to a function. And thats why I've wanted to do a copy of input data. I think it can be very frustrating for someone who might use your function and then realize that his data is somehow changed by your function ;)

Kolrim on Sept. 30, 2016, 7:33 p.m.
Alright, thanks for clearing that up for me! See you around.

GitHub

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.