Gold nugget storage

The name of the pictureThe name of the pictureThe name of the pictureClash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP











up vote
5
down vote

favorite












Given a positive integer, write it as the sum of numbers, where each of them is in $kin1,9,81,tin1,2,3,...,64$. How many numbers at least are used? Shortest code win.



Samples:



Input Output Method
1 1 1
2 1 2
64 1 64
65 2 64+1
72 1 72
343 2 342+1
576 1 576
577 2 576+1
5184 1 5184
46656 9 5184+5184+5184+5184+5184+5184+5184+5184+5184
5274 2 5184+90


enter image description here










share|improve this question



















  • 4




    Could you give slightly more detail/put into words how the input results in the output?
    – Quintec
    9 hours ago






  • 2




    If something requires clarification in the comments, it would be useful to edit the challenge to include that clarification
    – trichoplax
    9 hours ago






  • 1




    Is it basically a sort of change-making problem ? With the coins denominations being in the set 1,9,81 × 1...64 ?
    – digEmAll
    9 hours ago







  • 1




    Are you trying to minimize the number of items or number of stacks?
    – fəˈnɛtɪk
    9 hours ago






  • 1




    @fəˈnɛtɪk number of stacks for minecraft picture, item(numbers to be added) for the problem
    – l4m2
    9 hours ago














up vote
5
down vote

favorite












Given a positive integer, write it as the sum of numbers, where each of them is in $kin1,9,81,tin1,2,3,...,64$. How many numbers at least are used? Shortest code win.



Samples:



Input Output Method
1 1 1
2 1 2
64 1 64
65 2 64+1
72 1 72
343 2 342+1
576 1 576
577 2 576+1
5184 1 5184
46656 9 5184+5184+5184+5184+5184+5184+5184+5184+5184
5274 2 5184+90


enter image description here










share|improve this question



















  • 4




    Could you give slightly more detail/put into words how the input results in the output?
    – Quintec
    9 hours ago






  • 2




    If something requires clarification in the comments, it would be useful to edit the challenge to include that clarification
    – trichoplax
    9 hours ago






  • 1




    Is it basically a sort of change-making problem ? With the coins denominations being in the set 1,9,81 × 1...64 ?
    – digEmAll
    9 hours ago







  • 1




    Are you trying to minimize the number of items or number of stacks?
    – fəˈnɛtɪk
    9 hours ago






  • 1




    @fəˈnɛtɪk number of stacks for minecraft picture, item(numbers to be added) for the problem
    – l4m2
    9 hours ago












up vote
5
down vote

favorite









up vote
5
down vote

favorite











Given a positive integer, write it as the sum of numbers, where each of them is in $kin1,9,81,tin1,2,3,...,64$. How many numbers at least are used? Shortest code win.



Samples:



Input Output Method
1 1 1
2 1 2
64 1 64
65 2 64+1
72 1 72
343 2 342+1
576 1 576
577 2 576+1
5184 1 5184
46656 9 5184+5184+5184+5184+5184+5184+5184+5184+5184
5274 2 5184+90


enter image description here










share|improve this question















Given a positive integer, write it as the sum of numbers, where each of them is in $kin1,9,81,tin1,2,3,...,64$. How many numbers at least are used? Shortest code win.



Samples:



Input Output Method
1 1 1
2 1 2
64 1 64
65 2 64+1
72 1 72
343 2 342+1
576 1 576
577 2 576+1
5184 1 5184
46656 9 5184+5184+5184+5184+5184+5184+5184+5184+5184
5274 2 5184+90


enter image description here







code-golf






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited 2 hours ago

























asked 9 hours ago









l4m2

4,1991432




4,1991432







  • 4




    Could you give slightly more detail/put into words how the input results in the output?
    – Quintec
    9 hours ago






  • 2




    If something requires clarification in the comments, it would be useful to edit the challenge to include that clarification
    – trichoplax
    9 hours ago






  • 1




    Is it basically a sort of change-making problem ? With the coins denominations being in the set 1,9,81 × 1...64 ?
    – digEmAll
    9 hours ago







  • 1




    Are you trying to minimize the number of items or number of stacks?
    – fəˈnɛtɪk
    9 hours ago






  • 1




    @fəˈnɛtɪk number of stacks for minecraft picture, item(numbers to be added) for the problem
    – l4m2
    9 hours ago












  • 4




    Could you give slightly more detail/put into words how the input results in the output?
    – Quintec
    9 hours ago






  • 2




    If something requires clarification in the comments, it would be useful to edit the challenge to include that clarification
    – trichoplax
    9 hours ago






  • 1




    Is it basically a sort of change-making problem ? With the coins denominations being in the set 1,9,81 × 1...64 ?
    – digEmAll
    9 hours ago







  • 1




    Are you trying to minimize the number of items or number of stacks?
    – fəˈnɛtɪk
    9 hours ago






  • 1




    @fəˈnɛtɪk number of stacks for minecraft picture, item(numbers to be added) for the problem
    – l4m2
    9 hours ago







4




4




Could you give slightly more detail/put into words how the input results in the output?
– Quintec
9 hours ago




Could you give slightly more detail/put into words how the input results in the output?
– Quintec
9 hours ago




2




2




If something requires clarification in the comments, it would be useful to edit the challenge to include that clarification
– trichoplax
9 hours ago




If something requires clarification in the comments, it would be useful to edit the challenge to include that clarification
– trichoplax
9 hours ago




1




1




Is it basically a sort of change-making problem ? With the coins denominations being in the set 1,9,81 × 1...64 ?
– digEmAll
9 hours ago





Is it basically a sort of change-making problem ? With the coins denominations being in the set 1,9,81 × 1...64 ?
– digEmAll
9 hours ago





1




1




Are you trying to minimize the number of items or number of stacks?
– fəˈnɛtɪk
9 hours ago




Are you trying to minimize the number of items or number of stacks?
– fəˈnɛtɪk
9 hours ago




1




1




@fəˈnɛtɪk number of stacks for minecraft picture, item(numbers to be added) for the problem
– l4m2
9 hours ago




@fəˈnɛtɪk number of stacks for minecraft picture, item(numbers to be added) for the problem
– l4m2
9 hours ago










4 Answers
4






active

oldest

votes

















up vote
3
down vote














Jelly, 17 bytes



64R×9;Ɗ⁺ff€¥@ŒṗẈṂ


Try it online!



-1 thanks to Jonathan Allan.



Explanation (you can't test for inputs larger than 58 over TIO):



64R×9;Ɗ⁺ff€¥@ŒṗẈṂ Arguments: x
64R [1..64]
×9;Ɗ Multiply by 9, prepend to original list
⁺ Do the above once more
Œṗ Positive integer partitions of x
¥@ Call with reversed arguments (x = partitions, y = flattened outer product)
f€ For each partition in x, keep the elements that are in y
f Keep the elements of x that have remained intact after the above
Ẉ Lengths of the remaining partitions
Ṃ Minimum





share|improve this answer






















  • Since the output in testable area is trivial, can't quite check?
    – l4m2
    2 hours ago

















up vote
2
down vote













JavaScript (ES6), 72 66 57 56 bytes



Saved 1 byte thanks to @nwellnhof





f=n=>n&&1+f(n<5184?n>64&&n%(n<576?9:n>719?81:72):n-5184)


Try it online!






share|improve this answer






















  • @nwellnhof This would fail for several values (576, 632, 633, ...)
    – Arnauld
    4 hours ago










  • I see. But f=n=>n&&1+f(n<5184?n>64&&n%(n<576?9:n<648?72:81):n-5184) (56 bytes) should work, right?
    – nwellnhof
    3 hours ago










  • @nwellnhof Yes, it does. :)
    – Arnauld
    2 hours ago

















up vote
1
down vote














05AB1E (legacy), 30 bytes



5184‰`91SvDy64*›i1sy9*%}}64/îO


Try it online!



This is my first 05AB1E submission, so I am sure that this can be optimized.






share|improve this answer





























    up vote
    1
    down vote














    Perl 6, 47 bytes





    +($_,(*X-(1,9,81 X*^65)).grep(*>=0).min...^0)


    Try it online!



    A greedy algorithm seems to work.






    share|improve this answer




















      Your Answer





      StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
      return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function ()
      StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix)
      StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["\$", "\$"]]);
      );
      );
      , "mathjax-editing");

      StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
      StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function ()
      StackExchange.using("snippets", function ()
      StackExchange.snippets.init();
      );
      );
      , "code-snippets");

      StackExchange.ready(function()
      var channelOptions =
      tags: "".split(" "),
      id: "200"
      ;
      initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

      StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
      // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
      if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
      StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
      createEditor();
      );

      else
      createEditor();

      );

      function createEditor()
      StackExchange.prepareEditor(
      heartbeatType: 'answer',
      convertImagesToLinks: false,
      noModals: true,
      showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
      reputationToPostImages: null,
      bindNavPrevention: true,
      postfix: "",
      imageUploader:
      brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
      contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
      allowUrls: true
      ,
      onDemand: true,
      discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
      ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
      );



      );













       

      draft saved


      draft discarded


















      StackExchange.ready(
      function ()
      StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fcodegolf.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f175710%2fgold-nugget-storage%23new-answer', 'question_page');

      );

      Post as a guest






























      4 Answers
      4






      active

      oldest

      votes








      4 Answers
      4






      active

      oldest

      votes









      active

      oldest

      votes






      active

      oldest

      votes








      up vote
      3
      down vote














      Jelly, 17 bytes



      64R×9;Ɗ⁺ff€¥@ŒṗẈṂ


      Try it online!



      -1 thanks to Jonathan Allan.



      Explanation (you can't test for inputs larger than 58 over TIO):



      64R×9;Ɗ⁺ff€¥@ŒṗẈṂ Arguments: x
      64R [1..64]
      ×9;Ɗ Multiply by 9, prepend to original list
      ⁺ Do the above once more
      Œṗ Positive integer partitions of x
      ¥@ Call with reversed arguments (x = partitions, y = flattened outer product)
      f€ For each partition in x, keep the elements that are in y
      f Keep the elements of x that have remained intact after the above
      Ẉ Lengths of the remaining partitions
      Ṃ Minimum





      share|improve this answer






















      • Since the output in testable area is trivial, can't quite check?
        – l4m2
        2 hours ago














      up vote
      3
      down vote














      Jelly, 17 bytes



      64R×9;Ɗ⁺ff€¥@ŒṗẈṂ


      Try it online!



      -1 thanks to Jonathan Allan.



      Explanation (you can't test for inputs larger than 58 over TIO):



      64R×9;Ɗ⁺ff€¥@ŒṗẈṂ Arguments: x
      64R [1..64]
      ×9;Ɗ Multiply by 9, prepend to original list
      ⁺ Do the above once more
      Œṗ Positive integer partitions of x
      ¥@ Call with reversed arguments (x = partitions, y = flattened outer product)
      f€ For each partition in x, keep the elements that are in y
      f Keep the elements of x that have remained intact after the above
      Ẉ Lengths of the remaining partitions
      Ṃ Minimum





      share|improve this answer






















      • Since the output in testable area is trivial, can't quite check?
        – l4m2
        2 hours ago












      up vote
      3
      down vote










      up vote
      3
      down vote










      Jelly, 17 bytes



      64R×9;Ɗ⁺ff€¥@ŒṗẈṂ


      Try it online!



      -1 thanks to Jonathan Allan.



      Explanation (you can't test for inputs larger than 58 over TIO):



      64R×9;Ɗ⁺ff€¥@ŒṗẈṂ Arguments: x
      64R [1..64]
      ×9;Ɗ Multiply by 9, prepend to original list
      ⁺ Do the above once more
      Œṗ Positive integer partitions of x
      ¥@ Call with reversed arguments (x = partitions, y = flattened outer product)
      f€ For each partition in x, keep the elements that are in y
      f Keep the elements of x that have remained intact after the above
      Ẉ Lengths of the remaining partitions
      Ṃ Minimum





      share|improve this answer















      Jelly, 17 bytes



      64R×9;Ɗ⁺ff€¥@ŒṗẈṂ


      Try it online!



      -1 thanks to Jonathan Allan.



      Explanation (you can't test for inputs larger than 58 over TIO):



      64R×9;Ɗ⁺ff€¥@ŒṗẈṂ Arguments: x
      64R [1..64]
      ×9;Ɗ Multiply by 9, prepend to original list
      ⁺ Do the above once more
      Œṗ Positive integer partitions of x
      ¥@ Call with reversed arguments (x = partitions, y = flattened outer product)
      f€ For each partition in x, keep the elements that are in y
      f Keep the elements of x that have remained intact after the above
      Ẉ Lengths of the remaining partitions
      Ṃ Minimum






      share|improve this answer














      share|improve this answer



      share|improve this answer








      edited 6 hours ago

























      answered 7 hours ago









      Erik the Outgolfer

      30.2k428100




      30.2k428100











      • Since the output in testable area is trivial, can't quite check?
        – l4m2
        2 hours ago
















      • Since the output in testable area is trivial, can't quite check?
        – l4m2
        2 hours ago















      Since the output in testable area is trivial, can't quite check?
      – l4m2
      2 hours ago




      Since the output in testable area is trivial, can't quite check?
      – l4m2
      2 hours ago










      up vote
      2
      down vote













      JavaScript (ES6), 72 66 57 56 bytes



      Saved 1 byte thanks to @nwellnhof





      f=n=>n&&1+f(n<5184?n>64&&n%(n<576?9:n>719?81:72):n-5184)


      Try it online!






      share|improve this answer






















      • @nwellnhof This would fail for several values (576, 632, 633, ...)
        – Arnauld
        4 hours ago










      • I see. But f=n=>n&&1+f(n<5184?n>64&&n%(n<576?9:n<648?72:81):n-5184) (56 bytes) should work, right?
        – nwellnhof
        3 hours ago










      • @nwellnhof Yes, it does. :)
        – Arnauld
        2 hours ago














      up vote
      2
      down vote













      JavaScript (ES6), 72 66 57 56 bytes



      Saved 1 byte thanks to @nwellnhof





      f=n=>n&&1+f(n<5184?n>64&&n%(n<576?9:n>719?81:72):n-5184)


      Try it online!






      share|improve this answer






















      • @nwellnhof This would fail for several values (576, 632, 633, ...)
        – Arnauld
        4 hours ago










      • I see. But f=n=>n&&1+f(n<5184?n>64&&n%(n<576?9:n<648?72:81):n-5184) (56 bytes) should work, right?
        – nwellnhof
        3 hours ago










      • @nwellnhof Yes, it does. :)
        – Arnauld
        2 hours ago












      up vote
      2
      down vote










      up vote
      2
      down vote









      JavaScript (ES6), 72 66 57 56 bytes



      Saved 1 byte thanks to @nwellnhof





      f=n=>n&&1+f(n<5184?n>64&&n%(n<576?9:n>719?81:72):n-5184)


      Try it online!






      share|improve this answer














      JavaScript (ES6), 72 66 57 56 bytes



      Saved 1 byte thanks to @nwellnhof





      f=n=>n&&1+f(n<5184?n>64&&n%(n<576?9:n>719?81:72):n-5184)


      Try it online!







      share|improve this answer














      share|improve this answer



      share|improve this answer








      edited 2 hours ago

























      answered 8 hours ago









      Arnauld

      68.1k584288




      68.1k584288











      • @nwellnhof This would fail for several values (576, 632, 633, ...)
        – Arnauld
        4 hours ago










      • I see. But f=n=>n&&1+f(n<5184?n>64&&n%(n<576?9:n<648?72:81):n-5184) (56 bytes) should work, right?
        – nwellnhof
        3 hours ago










      • @nwellnhof Yes, it does. :)
        – Arnauld
        2 hours ago
















      • @nwellnhof This would fail for several values (576, 632, 633, ...)
        – Arnauld
        4 hours ago










      • I see. But f=n=>n&&1+f(n<5184?n>64&&n%(n<576?9:n<648?72:81):n-5184) (56 bytes) should work, right?
        – nwellnhof
        3 hours ago










      • @nwellnhof Yes, it does. :)
        – Arnauld
        2 hours ago















      @nwellnhof This would fail for several values (576, 632, 633, ...)
      – Arnauld
      4 hours ago




      @nwellnhof This would fail for several values (576, 632, 633, ...)
      – Arnauld
      4 hours ago












      I see. But f=n=>n&&1+f(n<5184?n>64&&n%(n<576?9:n<648?72:81):n-5184) (56 bytes) should work, right?
      – nwellnhof
      3 hours ago




      I see. But f=n=>n&&1+f(n<5184?n>64&&n%(n<576?9:n<648?72:81):n-5184) (56 bytes) should work, right?
      – nwellnhof
      3 hours ago












      @nwellnhof Yes, it does. :)
      – Arnauld
      2 hours ago




      @nwellnhof Yes, it does. :)
      – Arnauld
      2 hours ago










      up vote
      1
      down vote














      05AB1E (legacy), 30 bytes



      5184‰`91SvDy64*›i1sy9*%}}64/îO


      Try it online!



      This is my first 05AB1E submission, so I am sure that this can be optimized.






      share|improve this answer


























        up vote
        1
        down vote














        05AB1E (legacy), 30 bytes



        5184‰`91SvDy64*›i1sy9*%}}64/îO


        Try it online!



        This is my first 05AB1E submission, so I am sure that this can be optimized.






        share|improve this answer
























          up vote
          1
          down vote










          up vote
          1
          down vote










          05AB1E (legacy), 30 bytes



          5184‰`91SvDy64*›i1sy9*%}}64/îO


          Try it online!



          This is my first 05AB1E submission, so I am sure that this can be optimized.






          share|improve this answer















          05AB1E (legacy), 30 bytes



          5184‰`91SvDy64*›i1sy9*%}}64/îO


          Try it online!



          This is my first 05AB1E submission, so I am sure that this can be optimized.







          share|improve this answer














          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer








          edited 5 hours ago

























          answered 5 hours ago









          Black Owl Kai

          4217




          4217




















              up vote
              1
              down vote














              Perl 6, 47 bytes





              +($_,(*X-(1,9,81 X*^65)).grep(*>=0).min...^0)


              Try it online!



              A greedy algorithm seems to work.






              share|improve this answer
























                up vote
                1
                down vote














                Perl 6, 47 bytes





                +($_,(*X-(1,9,81 X*^65)).grep(*>=0).min...^0)


                Try it online!



                A greedy algorithm seems to work.






                share|improve this answer






















                  up vote
                  1
                  down vote










                  up vote
                  1
                  down vote










                  Perl 6, 47 bytes





                  +($_,(*X-(1,9,81 X*^65)).grep(*>=0).min...^0)


                  Try it online!



                  A greedy algorithm seems to work.






                  share|improve this answer













                  Perl 6, 47 bytes





                  +($_,(*X-(1,9,81 X*^65)).grep(*>=0).min...^0)


                  Try it online!



                  A greedy algorithm seems to work.







                  share|improve this answer












                  share|improve this answer



                  share|improve this answer










                  answered 2 hours ago









                  nwellnhof

                  5,608921




                  5,608921



























                       

                      draft saved


                      draft discarded















































                       


                      draft saved


                      draft discarded














                      StackExchange.ready(
                      function ()
                      StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fcodegolf.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f175710%2fgold-nugget-storage%23new-answer', 'question_page');

                      );

                      Post as a guest













































































                      Popular posts from this blog

                      How to check contact read email or not when send email to Individual?

                      Bahrain

                      Postfix configuration issue with fips on centos 7; mailgun relay