Talk:Solve a Hidato puzzle: Difference between revisions
Content added Content deleted
(→Needed improvements: agreed on Knights Tour adding little here) |
(→TCL counterexample: new section) |
||
Line 50: | Line 50: | ||
–[[User:Dkf|Nigel Galloway]] |
–[[User:Dkf|Nigel Galloway]] |
||
: Perhaps worthy of its own task. There are probably lots of interesting research and discussion for Numbrix. --[[User:Dgamey|Dgamey]] 21:05, 13 January 2012 (UTC) |
: Perhaps worthy of its own task. There are probably lots of interesting research and discussion for Numbrix. --[[User:Dgamey|Dgamey]] 21:05, 13 January 2012 (UTC) |
||
== TCL counterexample == |
|||
The TCL code logic is unsound: even if a unique solution exist, it doesn't mean any "leg" of the initial puzzle has a unique partial solution. Try this: |
|||
<lang tcl>solveHidato " |
|||
. 4 . |
|||
0 7 0 |
|||
1 0 0 |
|||
"</lang> and the program will fail to find anything. --[[User:Ledrug|Ledrug]] 18:15, 1 May 2012 (UTC) |