The localized versions of the Core Certification will be discontinued on September 22, 2023. To take the exam in your preferred language, please schedule it before this date. The Core exam will still be available in English at any time after September 22, 2023. If future versions of the Core Certification exam are localized, we will promptly announce their release dates.
Want to get involved? We're always looking for ideas and content for Weekly Challenges.
SUBMIT YOUR IDEAExcellent, @MarqueeCrew ! Where I'm struggling though is how can you make it handle more than two toggles (on/off, e.g.) IntToBin is wonderful for 2 choices, but how can we make this work for 3, 4, 5 different answers for each option?
Good point. When I created this, I knew that I could handle the permutation calculation quickly enough. I didn't think through how to create the states so fast. I suppose that I'd have to do something like the append fields trick or multi-row to handle the appropriate state answers.
Congrats again on staying ahead of me in the solutions race. With zealous community members like @Thableaus and @DavidP leading the group, it's nice to see you rounding out the group.
Cheers,
Mark
This is definitely a brute force method as I am still working on the macro to be more dynamic. Definitely curious to see if anyone can be dynamic without using a macro!
Hi @estherb47
Here's my second pass at it with a custom iterative macro that does IntToBaseN().
Cheers
Dan
@MarqueeCrew, I really like the simplicity of your solution in the sense that it's a clean way to do the math without brute-forcing it with nested append tools like I did. I'm curious to know why you wrote your formula the way you did in Formula Tool (50). Couldn't you just leave off the "-1"? It looks like you account for it in your Generate Rows (40) by having your initialization expression at "0". I'm wondering if there's a reason you did it this way. Also, the Concat Options is clever. I think if I had thought of that from the beginning of my solution, things would have turned out differently - I seem to remember banging my head against the wall yesterday as I have all the results themselves concatenated as "Off,On,Off" (etc.), but was stumped at to how to break out the actual tool labels. Definitely one of those "so obvious, why didn't I think of that". Good experience to implement in future workflows, thanks!
Don't need maths - leave it up to chance!