China DOS Union

My head is about to break, and I can only use the substitution method to calculate. The following code is theoretically suitable for permutations within 10 digits, but I don't know why it has problems when it comes to 9 digits. It's frustrating.
@echo off&setlocal enabledelayedexpansion if exist pl.txt del /q pl.txt :set cls&set /p s1=Please enter the character group (please separate characters with spaces): if not defined s1 goto set for %%i in (%s1%) do set /a num+=1 for %%a in (%s1%) do ( set s2=!s1:%%a=! set str=%%a if "!str:~%num%!" neq "" echo !str!>>pl.txt for %%b in (!s2!) do ( set s3=!s2:%%b=! set str=%%a%%b if "!str:~%num%!" neq "" echo !str!>>pl.txt for %%c in (!s3!) do ( set s4=!s3:%%c=! set str=%%a%%b%%c if "!str:~%num%!" neq "" echo !str!>>pl.txt for %%d in (!s4!) do ( set s5=!s4:%%d=! set str=%%a%%b%%c%%d if "!str:~%num%!" neq "" echo !str!>>pl.txt for %%e in (!s5!) do ( set s6=!s5:%%e=! set str=%%a%%b%%c%%d%%e if "!str:~%num%!" neq "" echo !str!>>pl.txt for %%f in (!s6!) do ( set s7=!s6:%%f=! set str=%%a%%b%%c%%d%%e%%f if "!str:~%num%!" neq "" echo !str!>>pl.txt for %%g in (!s7!) do ( set s8=!s7:%%g=! set str=%%a%%b%%c%%d%%e%%f%%g if "!str:~%num%!" neq "" echo !str!>>pl.txt for %%h in (!s8!) do ( set s9=!s9:%%h=! set str=%%a%%b%%c%%d%%e%%f%%g%%h if "!str:~%num%!" neq "" echo !str!>>pl.txt for %%i in (!s9!) do ( set s10=!s9:%%i=! set str=%%a%%b%%c%%d%%e%%f%%g%%h%%i if "!str:~%num%!" neq "" echo !str!>>pl.txt for %%j in (!s10!) do ( set str=%%a%%b%%c%%d%%e%%f%%g%%h%%i%%j if "!str:~%num%!" neq "" echo !str!>>pl.txt )))))))))) start pl.txt

[ Last edited by zw19750516 on 2008-6-29 at 07:28 PM ]

Use recursion. I think the core code can be done in no more than 3 lines. Who wants to challenge?
Brother zw:
Your code generates temporary files and it's not called recursion. Your code can be classified as "unconventional"

Too much is troublesome, the main thing is that it is realized. If you want to arrange more, and so on...
@echo off setlocal enabledelayedexpansion :begin cls set "n=0" set /p s1=Please enter up to 8 characters separated by spaces: for %%i in (%s1%) do (set /a n+=1) if %n% gtr 8 goto :begin for %%a in (!s1!) do ( if "%n%"=="1" (echo %%a) else (set s2=!s1:%%a=!) for %%b in (!s2!) do ( if "%n%"=="2" (echo %%a%%b) else (set s3=!s2:%%b=!) for %%c in (!s3!) do ( if "%n%"=="3" (echo %%a%%b%%c) else (set s4=!s3:%%c=!) for %%d in (!s4!) do ( if "%n%"=="4" (echo %%a%%b%%c%%d) else (set s5=!s4:%%d=!) for %%e in (!s5!) do ( if "%n%"=="5" (echo %%a%%b%%c%%d%%e) else (set s6=!s5:%%e=!) for %%f in (!s6!) do ( if "%n%"=="6" (echo %%a%%b%%c%%d%%e%%f) else (set s7=!s6:%%f=!) for %%g in (!s7!) do ( if "%n%"=="7" (echo %%a%%b%%c%%d%%e%%f%%g) else (set s8=!s7:%%g=!) for %%h in (!s8!) do ( echo %%a%%b%%c%%d%%e%%f%%g%%h )))))))) pause&goto :begin

I think if this problem is thoroughly understood, it will be of great use...

What is the use? Generate a password dictionary for brute-force cracking?

It's not just brute-force cracking... In short, it's related to decoding...

If it's for guessing passwords, maybe it's more appropriate to change the code on floor 18 to the following:
@echo off setlocal enabledelayedexpansion :begin cls for /l %%a in (1 1 10) do (set "s%%a=") set "n="&set "var="&set "m="&set "count=" set /p var=Please enter less than 10 characters (it doesn't matter if you use spaces or not): :more_ set "s1=!s1!!var:~,1! " if not "!var:~1!"=="" set var=!var:~1!&goto :more_ for %%i in (%s1%) do (set /a m+=1) if %m% gtr 10 (echo.&echo ...Input error...&echo.&pause&goto :begin) set /p n=Please enter the number of characters to combine (default is all): set "t=%time%" if "%n%"=="" set "n=%m%" for %%a in (!s1!) do ( if "%n%"=="1" (set /a count+=1&echo %%a) else (set s2=!s1:%%a=!) for %%b in (!s2!) do ( if "%n%"=="2" (set /a count+=1&echo %%a%%b) else (set s3=!s2:%%b=!) for %%c in (!s3!) do ( if "%n%"=="3" (set /a count+=1&echo %%a%%b%%c) else (set s4=!s3:%%c=!) for %%d in (!s4!) do ( if "%n%"=="4" (set /a count+=1&echo %%a%%b%%c%%d) else (set s5=!s4:%%d=!) for %%e in (!s5!) do ( if "%n%"=="5" (set /a count+=1&echo %%a%%b%%c%%d%%e) else (set s6=!s5:%%e=!) for %%f in (!s6!) do ( if "%n%"=="6" (set /a count+=1&echo %%a%%b%%c%%d%%e%%f) else (set s7=!s6:%%f=!) for %%g in (!s7!) do ( if "%n%"=="7" (set /a count+=1&echo %%a%%b%%c%%d%%e%%f%%g) else (set s8=!s7:%%g=!) for %%h in (!s8!) do ( if "%n%"=="8" (set /a count+=1&echo %%a%%b%%c%%d%%e%%f%%g%%h) else (set s9=!s8:%%h=!) for %%i in (!s9!) do ( if "%n%"=="9" (set /a count+=1&echo %%a%%b%%c%%d%%e%%f%%g%%h%%i) else (set s10=!s9:%%i=!) for %%j in (!s10!) do ( set /a count+=1&echo %%a%%b%%c%%d%%e%%f%%g%%h%%i%%j )))))))))) echo.&echo There are %count% combinations&echo. echo %t% echo %time% echo.&pause&goto :begin

I use the "insertion method" and find that the efficiency is still pretty good, and the code is also short:
@echo off&setlocal enabledelayedexpansion set/p chr=Please enter the letters to be arranged, separated by spaces: for %%i in (%chr%) do set a=%%i set - %a%=ok&set chr=!chr:%a%=! for %%i in (%chr%) do call :out %%i for /f "delims=-= tokens=1" %%i in ('set -') do echo %%i pause>nul :out for /f "delims=-= tokens=1" %%i in ('set -') do ( set - %1%%i=ok for %%j in (%%i) do ( for %%k in (%%i) do (set str=!str! %%k&if %%j==%%k set str=!str! %1) set -!str!=ok&set str= ) set -%%i= )

After testing, when entering 7 numbers, the code on floor 23 took more than thirty seconds, while that on floor 22 only took a few seconds. Let's give it a try?? I have to go to work. I'll check the result tomorrow, haha

Sure, calling too many times naturally lowers efficiency. My key point is not to limit the number of characters.

If the given characters have duplicates, it's an error! For example: abbcd. Another example: 12321. Can this bug be modified and removed?

Article, code: 523066680
blog: http://hi.baidu.com/523066680
Posted at: http://www.cn-dos.net/forum/viewthread.php?tid=41243&fpage=1&highlight=&page=2 Floor 27

First, post the code
@echo off&setlocal enabledelayedexpansion title code by hi.baidu.com/523066680 errorcommand>list.x 2>nul echo,Allow string repetition, the number of characters is indefinite, don't try characters like spaces, etc. &echo. set /p str="Enter the string whose permutation conditions will be enumerated (in the form like: abcd): " call :fo "%str%" "" echo,--------The information has been imported into the list.x file, please check. pause exit :fo if %1=="" (echo,%~2 &echo,%~2>>list.x&goto :eof) if not defined _%~1 (set _%~1=-1) set str=%~1 :foa set /a _%~1+=1,foa=_%~1,fob=foa+1 call :fo "!str:~0,%foa%!!str:~%fob%!" "%~2!str:~%foa%,1!" set str=%~1 set /a foa=_%~1 if not "!str:~%foa%,-1!"=="" (goto :foa) set "_%~1=" goto :eof


I'm here. The blackboard newspaper is finished. I'm extremely relaxed. I saw this problem and "studied" it for a few days. I have some results and want to share them.
Main content: 1. Talk about the previous floor's code
2. Share what I learned in the process of solving the problem
First, talk about the content of the previous floor
The multiple for proposed by plp626 is the fastest. Although it can only handle a specified number of characters, it can be modified. The modification by floor 22 is good. I think it can meet the needs when there are up to 10 characters, especially the speed is as fast as directly typing the answer.
But as a scholar, it is necessary to seek a better way. So the code on floor 23 is very short (Good!), and meets the requirements. Although I didn't have time to understand it, the temporary problem found is:
When I enter 6 characters, when I press Enter at the end, it doesn't exit. I guess
Maybe there is a dead loop. Looking at it again, oh, sweat. Please add exit after pause>nul when testing.
In addition, it is natural that the running time is long when the number of input characters is large. I don't think this should be picked on.

I think the code on floor 23 is very short and concise, worthy of learning.

Next, first talk about what I learned in the process of solving the problem:
[Mainly wanting to discuss the recursive call of parameters. Regarding this problem, I saw Batman's fast solution last time,
I won't reprint it. Looking forward to Brother Batman's follow-up post]

1. Also want to improve the plp626 code. I played with the method of using %var% to represent a command execution. The following is the understanding version:
@echo off set fo="for %%1 in (a b c) do (for %%2 in (a b c) do (" set end="))" %fo:"=% echo %%1 %%2 %end:"=% pause

It feels too fun, not "automated" enough, right? OK, we use for to determine how many layers of for to use. I once tried to reorganize the idea of multiple For,
But there are too many variables and symbols, it's really impossible to do, stop working, don't waste the idea, do something else. Use this idea to realize:
List all combinations including itself of these symbols according to the symbols input by the user
This is a simpler topic. For example, if you enter 1 2, then output 1 1, 1 2, 2 1, 2 2. The advantage is mainly that the number of input characters is indefinite.
Although I don't understand "password dictionary", but it feels that this code should be more suitable (for example, when the password is 223456).
The code is as follows:
@echo off &setlocal enabledelayedexpansion title code by hi.baidu.com/523066680 set "fo=" &set "end=" &set "n=0" set /p "str=Enter characters, separated by spaces: " for %%a in (%str%) do set /a n+=1 for /l %%x in (1,1,%n%) do ( set fo="for %%%%x in (%str%) do (!fo!" set end="!end!)" set echo=!echo! %%%%x ) %fo:"=% echo %echo% %end:"=% pause


2. Return of call parameters
I think this may be achievable with Call. I remember that when Call returns, the following things are all original. Will the parameters also be original?



So, don't expect the variables of set to have "overlapping memory functions", either add numbers, but it will be very complicated.

-----------------The following content talks about call parameters
Talked too much nonsense, start to explore how powerful call is (understanding version of call parameter return):
@echo off call :a 123 :a echo %1 :b if %1==123 (call :a 456) else (goto :eof) echo %1 pause exit

It's still easy to understand? Here's a multi-layer one, play with call:
@echo off echo,call :fo "abcd" call :fo "abcd" pause exit :fo if %1=="" (echo,Parameter 1 has no more characters, return call, next sentence &goto :eof) set str=%~1 :foa echo,call :fo "%str:~1%" call :fo "%str:~1%" echo Returned, now the value of parameter 1 is %~1 goto :eof ::Must be very depressed, right? Why does the following echo show 4 times? The mystery is all in goto :eof because it was called multiple times itself.

It's getting more and more interesting to play. I don't plan to analyze my own code in detail. This article is not to confuse everyone, so I mainly use Chinese to describe it and talk about some things that may be useful.

Friendly reminder: Many problems have troubled me for a long time, and the last time I sorted out all the ideas was when I closed the computer. It can be seen: It's not good for thinking to face the computer often.
----------------End
My knowledge and ability are really limited. I feel that this layered call and layered return should be the "recursion" mentioned in the previous floor.
I hope those who have information can share the relevant materials. Now I feel like I have entered a completely unknown logical field....

[ Last edited by 523066680 on 2008-12-19 at 10:41 ]

I worked so hard writing this, and I have to spend money to post it in an internet café. How can I not give it a thumbs up?

If no one pays attention to it, I won't bother writing in the future....

[ Last edited by 523066680 on 2008-12-18 at 11:06 ]

Sometimes it's better to leave people some room for free thinking. Ideas are only for discussion, and the simpler the better. If written too detailed, it's easy to cause a fixed mindset.

A little suggestion, please don't take offense.

That's very good and makes sense. I've decided to revise the article to only discuss the batch processing techniques I learned during the process.