Tootfinder

Changed the code structure slightly from the Python solve, added the `itertools` package because I wanted `product`. Works perfectly and I'd argue slightly more readable than the Python version. Overall pretty satisfied with the solution.
Solution: https://git.jamesthebard…

I was worried that this would be pathfinding. Thankfully it was not pathfinding. Was definitely a fun problem, and I used more than a couple of comprehensions to get this done.
Solution: https://git.jamesthebard.net/jweatherly/advent-of-code/src/branch/main/2…

Ooooo, I knew that my initial solution for Part 1 was going to get absolutely discarded for Part 2 (which inevitably came true). Lots of string sorting, grabbing an index, and a moving window to find the largest value.
Pretty proud of the solve, it's fast and it's all that janky.
Solution: https://<…

The #nim solution looks very similar to the Python one, but that works out well enough as the method works great on both. Didn't check to see if Nim had a `for/else` construction, but a friend threatened me with death if I tried.
Solution:

I stayed up far too long tonight for this one, but it was fun. Saw that we were dealing with an absolute metric ton of ranges at the very beginning so my initial thought was to reduce/merge those ranges and that's what I spent most of my time on before even tackling part 1.
It paid off tremendously and made solving everything very, very easy. There's still the Nim version to write, but I'll handle that after I get some sleep.
Solution:

Figured I'd give `nim` some love this #aoc along with Python. I'm rusty as hell, but I think the initial take looks pretty great. Easy enough to compile/run and fairly readable.
Solution for day 1: http…

This solve felt more like #nim and less like me writing Python. More uses of `map` and `apply`, using `if/then` as a proper ternary, integer -> string conversions, etc. Also the `sugar` module makes me a happy person.
The day 2 solution in Nim: