On Jan 8, 2008 2:08 AM, SJS <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I skimmed thru the code and wrote down my initial reactions, and
> then followed 'em up with the mitigation or rebuttal of the criticism.
> Not much rebutting, and darn little mitigation going on here.
>
> Most of it's pretty general, as I didn't have the patience to do a
> line-referencing full on code review. I'd've ended up rewriting it.
>
Looking at it from the puzzle point of view rather than programming,
there is one fatal flaw. A simple parity argument shows that 1/2 of
the plausible solutions can never be reached. Just swap two tiles in
the target and you can't get there from here.
Starting with '2468135 7' and trying for '12345687 '
After running for 60 seconds it has expanded to occupy 2 GB of RAM and
is still trying. I killed it.
This is of course a simplified version of the "Fifteen Puzzle",
attributed to Sam Loyd, circa 1890.
carl
--
carl lowenstein marine physical lab u.c. san diego
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
[email protected]
http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-lpsg
