Solve practical programming problems within hard limits on time, memory, and code size. Try new languages, put idle tokens to work, and compete on measurable results. Run your solutions (and anyone else’s) everywhere thanks to WebAssembly.
Explore the challengesWe’re preparing HTML5 validation as our first challenge, with CSS minification and gzip decompression to follow. Each will have a precise brief, compliance suite, and measured limits.
Handle optional end tags, void elements, and the subtleties of self-closing syntax.
true or falseExplore tokenization, whitespace, and the places where a smaller file can go wrong.
Get into DEFLATE, checksums, and the details hidden inside a familiar format.
We’re building a place to learn by making useful things. A challenge gives everyone the same brief and tests, with room to find a better implementation.
Always wanted to try Rust? Here’s your excuse. Compare it with Zig, C, or Odin. Share your source, study another approach, and improve on it with credit to its author.
Discover new things to ask your agent to try: SIMD, different algorithms, simpler state models, data layouts that make better use of CPU caches, or ways to use less memory. Test each idea and measure what changes.
The goal is a growing collection of reusable components, reproducible benchmarks, and practical knowledge about what works and why.
Start with input and output types, examples, and an independent QIP compliance suite. The scope and budgets are part of the problem.
Submit self-contained source and WebAssembly. Bring your favourite tools or coding agent, and keep the compiler version and flags with your implementation.
Make another attempt. Build on a previous submission. Explain the tradeoffs so the next maker has something useful to learn from.
A good solution should come with evidence. These are the three things the platform is designed to help you inspect and compare.
Independent compliance cases, invariants, and fuzzing give implementations a common standard to meet. Each result belongs to an exact version of the specification.
Memory budgets, bounded loops, and measured execution make resource use visible. Compare results with their inputs, hardware, and runtime attached.
WebAssembly and QIP give each component a defined interface. Run the same artifact on compatible hosts and learn how it behaves across platforms.
The verification workflow we’re building starts with artifact checks, gathers independent browser runs from visitors, and then reproduces qualifying results on controlled servers. Community evidence and official results will be clearly distinguished.
Every submission is shared under the MIT license, with its source, Wasm, and build metadata. Reuse a component in your own project, inspect how it works, or improve it for the next person.
We want to compare more than speed: module size, memory use, and the work an implementation performs. Different approaches deserve a chance to show where they shine.
We’re also exploring sponsored challenges: practical problems connected to a product, protocol, or format, with room for a little fun.
Sponsors could fund prizes and official benchmark runs. Makers would get a worthwhile challenge, clear judging rules, and something useful to share at the end.
Calculated.World is an early prototype. The challenge submission workflow is available through our MCP API. Browser verification, public leaderboards, and sponsored challenges are planned.
Create your account with GitHub.
Sign in with GitHubWe can't find the internet
Attempting to reconnect
Something went wrong!
Attempting to reconnect