Hi John, I tested in Microsoft Minesweeper, and now see that you are correct. If a square is flagged is does not get revealed.
I'm not sure how much I like that concept. In my mind, the Flags are there to help you remember which squares you have already determined were mines. If you open up a square with " " or 0 mines around it, you know for certain that the surrounding blocks are all clear. If one of those blocks was flagged, it was incorrectly flagged. Should the incorrect flag be left there, despite the fact the game is basically telling you "There is no mine there" ? I guess that would be a question for real Minesweeper enthusiasts. Best, George On Mon, Apr 17, 2017 at 10:32 PM, George Rimakis <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi John, > > This sounds expected. If you clear a square with no adjacent mines it > reveals that square and all adjacent squares. > > You can probably replicate this by flagging a square on the opening move, > and selecting a square next to it. Since on the opening move you never will > have a mine in the adjacent squares, you'll have the test case. > > ~George > > > On Apr 17, 2017, at 10:20 PM, John R. Hogerhuis <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > > > Not sure if you have a test case for this, but I think I saw a bug (not > able to confirm without some more head scratching). > > > > What I *think* I saw was a problem in the algorithm for revealing the > blank patches... I think I had flagged a spot, and when it revealed the > blank patch it replaced my flag with the adjacent mine count. > > > > Really not sure though. It might be working fine. > > > > -- John. >
