Hi George, This is great! Thanks for creating it.
Clint On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 6:20 AM, George Michael Rimakis <[email protected]> wrote: > 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. >> > >
