Optimize Project Euler solutions

[dhruvmanila]

Feature description

If someone would like to take a stab at optimizing these solutions, feel free to open a PR or ask for any help here:

Slowest 10 durations

• Problem 145 / sol1.py (25.00s)
• Problem 070 / sol1.py (13.86s)
• Problem 104 / sol1.py (6.84s)
• Problem 092 / sol1.py (6.01s)
• Problem 010 / sol2.py (3.90s)
• Problem 010 / sol1.py (3.76s)
• Problem 078 / sol1.py (3.67s)
• Problem 135 / sol1.py (3.59s)
• Problem 073 / sol1.py (2.64s)
• Problem 034 / sol1.py (2.54s)

Reference: https://github.com/TheAlgorithms/Python/actions/runs/4580132675/jobs/8088552368#step:5:356

[ankit-gautam23]

Is this still open??

[dhruvmanila]

Is this still open??

Yes

[MatthiasHeinz]

Regarding problem 034, I've stumbled upon this proof .

This proof lowers the upper bound from the current limit = 7 * factorial(9) + 1 # 2,540,161 to 1,499,999, which eliminates 40% of values to be considered. Considering this eliminates the biggest values, this probably cuts runtime by more than 40%.

Additionally I'd prefer if that upper limit would have a comment / reference attached to it, stating their origin. Otherwise, this limit looks very arbitrary.

=============

Regarding the aforementioned proof: At first glance, admittedly it has two phrases, which are formulated incorrectly / ambiguously; but it looks solid.

1. The sentence

This implies that if n is a 7 digit number, either the second digit must be 0 or 1 or the last digit is 1.

should end in

[...] the first digit is 1.

2. The sentence

If the second digit is now 5, one of the remaining digits has to be at most 4.

should clarify

If the second digit is now at least 5 [...]

[Bjiornulf]

for problem 10, sol3.py is a solution using sieve and is fast. I don't think we can make sol1 and sol2 faster, unless sieve is also used. In that case, they should just be deleted IMO...

[dhruvmanila]

for problem 10, sol3.py is a solution using sieve and is fast. I don't think we can make sol1 and sol2 faster, unless sieve is also used. In that case, they should just be deleted IMO...

Thanks for chiming in! I agree although for now we shouldn't delete existing solutions but we're disallowing any new solutions unless it takes a completely different approach.

[quant12345]

@dhruvmanila I checked the boxes, but there is still a conflict, I can’t understand what?
Euler 070

[ManpreetXSingh]

Hi @dhruvmanila,

I've submitted two pull requests (#10558, #10580) that I believe are ready for review and merging. Could you please take a look and assist with the merge process?

Also, I've tried improving performance of project euler 104. I'm wondering if it would be a good idea to include these improvements in the same pull request (#10615).

Your feedback and assistance are greatly appreciated! Thanks in advance.

[dhruvmanila]

Hey @manpreetsingh2004, thanks and sorry to keep you waiting! I'll take a look at it this weekend.