Sorry for the delay posting this one, Ategon seemed to have it covered, so I forgot :D I will do better.

Haskell

Oof, a parsing problem :/ This is some nasty-ass code. step is almost the State monad written out explicitly.

import Control.Monad
import Data.Either
import Data.List
import Text.Parsec

data Ins = Mul !Int !Int | Do | Dont

readInput :: String -> [Ins]
readInput = fromRight undefined . parse input ""
  where
    input = many ins <* many anyChar
    ins =
      choice . map try $
        [ Mul <$> (string "mul(" *> arg) <*> (char ',' *> arg) <* char ')',
          Do <$ string "do()",
          Dont <$ string "don't()",
          anyChar *> ins
        ]
    arg = do
      s <- many1 digit
      guard $ length s <= 3
      return $ read s

run f = snd . foldl' step (True, 0)
  where
    step (e, a) i =
      case i of
        Mul x y -> (e, if f e then a + x * y else a)
        Do -> (True, a)
        Dont -> (False, a)

main = do
  input <- readInput <$> readFile "input03"
  print $ run (const True) input
  print $ run id input

Nim

From a first glance it was obviously a regex problem.
I’m using tinyre here instead of stdlib re library just because I’m more familiar with it.

import pkg/tinyre

proc solve(input: string): AOCSolution[int, int] =
  var allow = true
  for match in input.match(reG"mul\(\d+,\d+\)|do\(\)|don't\(\)"):
    if match == "do()": allow = true
    elif match == "don't()": allow = false
    else:
      let pair = match[4..^2].split(',')
      let mult = pair[0].parseInt * pair[1].parseInt
      result.part1 += mult
      if allow: result.part2 += mult

Codeberg repo

I started poking at doing a proper lexer/parser, but then I thought about how early in AoC it is and how low the chance is that the second part will require proper parsing.

So therefore; hello regex my old friend, I’ve come to talk with you again.

List<string> instructions = new List<string>();

public void Input(IEnumerable<string> lines)
{
  foreach (var line in lines)
    instructions.AddRange(Regex.Matches(line, @"mul\(\d+,\d+\)|do\(\)|don't\(\)").Select(m => m.Value));
}

public void Part1()
{
  var sum = instructions.Select(mul => Regex.Match(mul, @"(\d+),(\d+)").Groups.Values.Skip(1).Select(g => int.Parse(g.Value))).Select(cc => cc.Aggregate(1, (acc, val) => acc * val)).Sum();
  Console.WriteLine($"Sum: {sum}");
}
public void Part2()
{
  bool enabled = true;
  long sum = 0;
  foreach(var inst in instructions)
  {
    if (inst.StartsWith("don't"))
      enabled = false;
    else if (inst.StartsWith("do"))
      enabled = true;
    else if (enabled)
      sum += Regex.Match(inst, @"(\d+),(\d+)").Groups.Values.Skip(1).Select(g => int.Parse(g.Value)).Aggregate(1, (acc, val) => acc * val);
  }
  Console.WriteLine($"Sum: {sum}");
}

Haskell

module Main where

import Control.Arrow hiding ((+++))
import Data.Char
import Data.Functor
import Data.Maybe
import Text.ParserCombinators.ReadP hiding (get)
import Text.ParserCombinators.ReadP qualified as P

data Op = Mul Int Int | Do | Dont deriving (Show)

parser1 :: ReadP [(Int, Int)]
parser1 = catMaybes <$> many ((Just <$> mul) <++ (P.get $> Nothing))

parser2 :: ReadP [Op]
parser2 = catMaybes <$> many ((Just <$> operation) <++ (P.get $> Nothing))

mul :: ReadP (Int, Int)
mul = (,) <$> (string "mul(" *> (read <$> munch1 isDigit <* char ',')) <*> (read <$> munch1 isDigit <* char ')')

operation :: ReadP Op
operation = (string "do()" $> Do) +++ (string "don't()" $> Dont) +++ (uncurry Mul <$> mul)

foldOp :: (Bool, Int) -> Op -> (Bool, Int)
foldOp (_, n) Do = (True, n)
foldOp (_, n) Dont = (False, n)
foldOp (True, n) (Mul a b) = (True, n + a * b)
foldOp (False, n) _ = (False, n)

part1 = sum . fmap (uncurry (*)) . fst . last . readP_to_S parser1
part2 = snd . foldl foldOp (True, 0) . fst . last . readP_to_S parser2

main = getContents >>= print . (part1 &&& part2)

Uiua

Uses experimental feature of fold to track the running state of do/don’t.

[edit] Slightly re-written to make it less painful :-) Try it online!

# Experimental!
DataP₁       ← $ xmul(2,4)%&mul[3,7]!@^do_not_mul(5,5)+mul(32,64]then(mul(11,8)mul(8,5))
DataP₂       ← $ xmul(2,4)&mul[3,7]!^don't()_mul(5,5)+mul(32,64](mul(11,8)undo()?mul(8,5))
GetMul       ← $ mul\((\d{1,3}),(\d{1,3})\)
GetMulDoDont ← $ mul\(\d{1,3},\d{1,3}\)|do\(\)|don\'t\(\)

&p/+≡(/×≡⋕↘1)regexGetMul DataP₁ # Part 1

# Build an accumulator to track running state of do/don't
Filter ← ↘1⊂:∧(⍣(0 °"don"|1 °"do("|.◌)) :1≡(↙3°□)
≡⊢ regex GetMulDoDont DataP₂
▽⊸≡◇(≍"mul"↙3)▽⊸Filter      # Apply Filter, remove the spare 'do's
&p/+≡◇(/×≡◇⋕↘1⊢regexGetMul) # Get the digits and multiply, sum.

Elixir

First time writing Elixir. It’s probably janky af.

I’ve had some help from AI to get some pointers along the way. I’m not competing in any way, just trying to learn and have fun.

~~Part 2 is currently not working, and I can’t figure out why. I’m trying to just remove everything from “don’t()” to “do()” and just pass the rest through the working solution for part 1. Should work, right?

Any pointers?~~

edit; working solution:

defmodule Three do
  def get_input do
    File.read!("./input.txt")
  end

  def extract_operations(input) do
    Regex.scan(~r/mul\((\d{1,3}),(\d{1,3})\)/, input)
    |> Enum.map(fn [_op, num1, num2] ->
      num1 = String.to_integer(num1)
      num2 = String.to_integer(num2)
      [num1 * num2]
    end)
  end

  def sum_products(ops) do
    List.flatten(ops)
    |> Enum.filter(fn x -> is_integer(x) end)
    |> Enum.sum()
  end

  def part1 do
    extract_operations(get_input())
    |> sum_products()
  end

  def part2 do
    String.split(get_input(), ~r/don\'t\(\)[\s\S]*?do\(\)/)
    |> Enum.map(&extract_operations/1)
    |> sum_products()
  end
end

IO.puts("part 1: #{Three.part1()}")
IO.puts("part 2: #{Three.part2()}")

Python

Part1:

matches = re.findall(r"(mul\((\d+),(\d+)\))", input)
muls = [int(m[1]) * int(m[2]) for m in matches]
print(sum(muls))

Part2:

instructions = list(re.findall(r"(do\(\)|don't\(\)|(mul\((\d+),(\d+)\)))", input)
mul_enabled = True
muls = 0

for inst in instructions:
    if inst[0] == "don't()":
        mul_enabled = False
    elif inst[0] == "do()":
        mul_enabled = True
    elif mul_enabled:
        muls += int(inst[2]) * int(inst[3])

print(muls)

Go

Part 1, just find the regex groups, parse to int, and done.

func part1() {
	file, _ := os.Open("input.txt")
	defer file.Close()
	scanner := bufio.NewScanner(file)

	re := regexp.MustCompile(`mul\(([0-9]{1,3}),([0-9]{1,3})\)`)
	product := 0

	for scanner.Scan() {
		line := scanner.Text()
		submatches := re.FindAllStringSubmatch(line, -1)

		for _, s := range submatches {
			a, _ := strconv.Atoi(s[1])
			b, _ := strconv.Atoi(s[2])
			product += (a * b)
		}
	}

	fmt.Println(product)
}

Part 2, not so simple. Ended up doing some weird hack with a map to check if the multiplication was enabled or not. Also instead of finding regex groups I had to find the indices, and then interpret what those mean… Not very readable code I’m afraid

func part2() {
	file, _ := os.Open("input.txt")
	defer file.Close()
	scanner := bufio.NewScanner(file)

	mulRE := regexp.MustCompile(`mul\(([0-9]{1,3}),([0-9]{1,3})\)`)
	doRE := regexp.MustCompile(`do\(\)`)
	dontRE := regexp.MustCompile(`don't\(\)`)
	product := 0
	enabled := true

	for scanner.Scan() {
		line := scanner.Text()
		doIndices := doRE.FindAllStringIndex(line, -1)
		dontIndices := dontRE.FindAllStringIndex(line, -1)
		mulSubIndices := mulRE.FindAllStringSubmatchIndex(line, -1)

		mapIndices := make(map[int]string)
		for _, do := range doIndices {
			mapIndices[do[0]] = "do"
		}
		for _, dont := range dontIndices {
			mapIndices[dont[0]] = "dont"
		}
		for _, mul := range mulSubIndices {
			mapIndices[mul[0]] = "mul"
		}

		nextMatch := 0

		for i := 0; i < len(line); i++ {
			val, ok := mapIndices[i]
			if ok && val == "do" {
				enabled = true
			} else if ok && val == "dont" {
				enabled = false
			} else if ok && val == "mul" {
				if enabled {
					match := mulSubIndices[nextMatch]
					a, _ := strconv.Atoi(string(line[match[2]:match[3]]))
					b, _ := strconv.Atoi(string(line[match[4]:match[5]]))
					product += (a * b)
				}
				nextMatch++
			}
		}
	}

	fmt.Println(product)
}

Raku

sub MAIN($input) {
    grammar Muls {
        token TOP { .*? <mul>+%.*? .* }
        token mul { "mul(" <number> "," <number> ")" }
        token number { \d+ }
    }

    my $parsedMuls = Muls.parsefile($input);
    my @muls = $parsedMuls<mul>.map({.<number>».Int});
    my $part-one-solution = @muls.map({[*] $_.List}).sum;
    say "part 1: $part-one-solution";

    grammar EnabledMuls {
        token TOP { .*? [<.disabled> || <mul>]+%.*? .* }
        token mul { "mul(" <number> "," <number> ")" }
        token number { \d+ }
        token disabled { "don't()" .*? ["do()" || $] }
    }

    my $parsedEnabledMuls = EnabledMuls.parsefile($input);
    my @enabledMuls = $parsedEnabledMuls<mul>.map({.<number>».Int});
    my $part-two-solution = @enabledMuls.map({[*] $_.List}).sum;
    say "part 2: $part-two-solution";
}

github

Python

def process(input, part2=False):
    if part2:
        input = re.sub(r'don\'t\(\).+?do\(\)', '', input) # remove everything between don't() and do()
    total = [ int(i[0]) * int(i[1]) for i in re.findall(r'mul\((\d+),(\d+)\)', input) ]
    return sum(total)

Given the structure of the input file, we just have to ignore everything between don’t() and do(), so remove those from the instructions before processing.

Gleam

Struggled with the second part as I am still very new to this very cool language, but got there after scrolling for some inspiration.

import gleam/int
import gleam/io
import gleam/list
import gleam/regex
import gleam/result
import gleam/string
import simplifile

pub fn main() {
  let assert Ok(data) = simplifile.read("input.in")
  part_one(data) |> io.debug
  part_two(data) |> io.debug
}

fn part_one(data) {
  let assert Ok(multiplication_pattern) =
    regex.from_string("mul\\(\\d{1,3},\\d{1,3}\\)")
  let assert Ok(digit_pattern) = regex.from_string("\\d{1,3},\\d{1,3}")
  let multiplications =
    regex.scan(multiplication_pattern, data)
    |> list.flat_map(fn(reg) {
      regex.scan(digit_pattern, reg.content)
      |> list.map(fn(digits) {
        digits.content
        |> string.split(",")
        |> list.map(fn(x) { x |> int.parse |> result.unwrap(0) })
        |> list.reduce(fn(a, b) { a * b })
        |> result.unwrap(0)
      })
    })
    |> list.reduce(fn(a, b) { a + b })
    |> result.unwrap(0)
}

fn part_two(data) {
  let data = "do()" <> string.replace(data, "\n", "") <> "don't()"
  let assert Ok(pattern) = regex.from_string("do\\(\\).*?don't\\(\\)")
  regex.scan(pattern, data)
  |> list.map(fn(input) { input.content |> part_one })
  |> list.reduce(fn(a, b) { a + b })
}

Rust

use crate::utils::read_lines;

pub fn solution1() {
    let lines = read_lines("src/day3/input.txt");
    let sum = lines
        .map(|line| {
            let mut sum = 0;
            let mut command_bytes = Vec::new();
            for byte in line.bytes() {
                match (byte, command_bytes.as_slice()) {
                    (b')', [.., b'0'..=b'9']) => {
                        handle_mul(&mut command_bytes, &mut sum);
                    }
                    _ if matches_mul(byte, &command_bytes) => {
                        command_bytes.push(byte);
                    }
                    _ => {
                        command_bytes.clear();
                    }
                }
            }

            sum
        })
        .sum::<usize>();

    println!("Sum of multiplication results = {sum}");
}

pub fn solution2() {
    let lines = read_lines("src/day3/input.txt");

    let mut can_mul = true;
    let sum = lines
        .map(|line| {
            let mut sum = 0;
            let mut command_bytes = Vec::new();
            for byte in line.bytes() {
                match (byte, command_bytes.as_slice()) {
                    (b')', [.., b'0'..=b'9']) if can_mul => {
                        handle_mul(&mut command_bytes, &mut sum);
                    }
                    (b')', [b'd', b'o', b'(']) => {
                        can_mul = true;
                        command_bytes.clear();
                    }
                    (b')', [.., b't', b'(']) => {
                        can_mul = false;
                        command_bytes.clear();
                    }
                    _ if matches_do_or_dont(byte, &command_bytes)
                        || matches_mul(byte, &command_bytes) =>
                    {
                        command_bytes.push(byte);
                    }
                    _ => {
                        command_bytes.clear();
                    }
                }
            }

            sum
        })
        .sum::<usize>();

    println!("Sum of enabled multiplication results = {sum}");
}

fn matches_mul(byte: u8, command_bytes: &[u8]) -> bool {
    matches!(
        (byte, command_bytes),
        (b'm', [])
            | (b'u', [.., b'm'])
            | (b'l', [.., b'u'])
            | (b'(', [.., b'l'])
            | (b'0'..=b'9', [.., b'(' | b'0'..=b'9' | b','])
            | (b',', [.., b'0'..=b'9'])
    )
}

fn matches_do_or_dont(byte: u8, command_bytes: &[u8]) -> bool {
    matches!(
        (byte, command_bytes),
        (b'd', [])
            | (b'o', [.., b'd'])
            | (b'n', [.., b'o'])
            | (b'\'', [.., b'n'])
            | (b'(', [.., b'o' | b't'])
            | (b't', [.., b'\''])
    )
}

fn handle_mul(command_bytes: &mut Vec<u8>, sum: &mut usize) {
    let first_num_index = command_bytes
        .iter()
        .position(u8::is_ascii_digit)
        .expect("Guarunteed to be there");
    let comma_index = command_bytes
        .iter()
        .position(|&c| c == b',')
        .expect("Guarunteed to be there.");

    let num1 = bytes_to_num(&command_bytes[first_num_index..comma_index]);
    let num2 = bytes_to_num(&command_bytes[comma_index + 1..]);

    *sum += num1 * num2;
    command_bytes.clear();
}

fn bytes_to_num(bytes: &[u8]) -> usize {
    bytes
        .iter()
        .rev()
        .enumerate()
        .map(|(i, digit)| (*digit - b'0') as usize * 10usize.pow(i as u32))
        .sum::<usize>()
}

Definitely not my prettiest code ever. It would probably look nicer if I used regex or some parsing library, but I took on the self-imposed challenge of not using third party libraries. Also, this is already further than I made it last year!

Uiua

Part 1:

&fras "day3/input.txt"
/+≡/×≡⋕≡↘1regex "mul\\((\\d+),(\\d+)\\)"

Part 2:

Filter ← ⍜⊜∘≡⋅""⊸⦷°□
.&fras "day3/input.txt"
∧Filter♭regex"don't\\(\\)?(.*?)(?:do\\(\\)|$)"
/+≡/×≡⋕≡↘1regex "mul\\((\\d+),(\\d+)\\)"

Kotlin

Just the standard Regex stuff. I found this website to be very helpful to write the patterns. (Very useful in general)

fun main() {
    fun part1(input: List<String>): Int =
        Regex("""mul\(\d+,\d+\)""").findAll(input.joinToString()).sumOf {
            with(Regex("""\d+""").findAll(it.value)) { this.first().value.toInt() * this.last().value.toInt() }
        }

    fun part2(input: List<String>): Int {
        var isMultiplyInstructionEnabled = true  // by default
        return Regex("""mul\(\d+,\d+\)|do\(\)|don't\(\)""").findAll(input.joinToString()).fold(0) { acc, instruction ->
            when (instruction.value) {
                "do()" -> acc.also { isMultiplyInstructionEnabled = true }
                "don't()" -> acc.also { isMultiplyInstructionEnabled = false }
                else -> {
                    if (isMultiplyInstructionEnabled) {
                        acc + with(Regex("""\d+""").findAll(instruction.value)) { this.first().value.toInt() * this.last().value.toInt() }
                    } else acc
                }
            }
        }
    }

    val testInputPart1 = readInput("Day03_test_part1")
    val testInputPart2 = readInput("Day03_test_part2")
    check(part1(testInputPart1) == 161)
    check(part2(testInputPart2) == 48)

    val input = readInput("Day03")
    part1(input).println()
    part2(input).println()
}

´´´