On Wednesday, 12 October 2016 at 22:16:38 UTC, tsbockman wrote:
On Wednesday, 12 October 2016 at 16:36:32 UTC, Andrei
On 10/12/2016 12:31 PM, Stefan Koch wrote:
I can take a look at 259.
14835 is nothing trivial though.
My understanding is Thomas has an attack on 259 once a
solution to 14835 is up. -- Andrei
Yes. The path to fix 259 is clear, and Lionello Lunesu and
myself have already done most of the work.
14835 is a blocker due to the nature of the solution that
Walter and Andrei approved (which I agree is the right one); an
independent implementation would run in to the same problem.