Two things come to mind: 1) *reductio ad absurdum* and 2) a Dustin Hoffman
film, wherein he says to a man, "I going to explain something so you'll
understand it!" and then shoots him.
I already had a function that does what I needed (see below) but was musing
about left/right parameter style, when one of the parameters remains
constant and the other changes "functionally" in the program.
Just looking at your first "simplification," I can see I have a lot of
familiarization work to do. For example, what's the difference between
2 3 <@, 3 4 and 1 2 <@:, 3 4
when the result is the same?
Must be something subtle.
=================
Note: The moves marked with "<-" are moves to a known solution.
NB. 15 position peg solitaire
NB. The board (position 5 initially vacant)
NB. 0
NB. 1 2
NB. 3 4 5
NB. 6 7 8 9
NB. 10 11 12 13 14
move_table =: 36 3 $ 0 2 5 5 2 0 0 1 3 3 1 0 1 3 6 6 3 1 1 4 8 8 4 1 2 4
7 7 4 2 2 5 9 9 5 2 3 6 10 10 6 3 3 7 12 12 7 3 3 4 5 5 4 3 4 7 11 11 7 4 4
8 13 13 8 4 5 8 12 12 8 5 5 9 14 14 9 5 6 7 8 8 7 6 7 8 9 9 8 7 10 11 12 12
11 10 11 12 13 13 12 11 12 13 14 14 13 12
id =: e. i. 15
flip =: (~: 3 : 'if. ((< & 2) @: #) y do. ({ & id) y else. (+./ @: ({ &
id)) y end. ')
legal_moves =: (#~ ((-: & 1 1 0)"1 @: ({~ & move_table)))
board =: 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
board
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
board =: board flip 5
board
1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
move_table legal_moves board
0 2 5 <-
3 4 5
12 8 5
14 9 5
board =: board flip 0 2 5
board
0 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
move_table legal_moves board
3 1 0 <-
7 4 2
9 5 2
board =: board flip 3 1 0
board
1 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
move_table legal_moves board
8 4 1
7 4 2
9 5 2
10 6 3
12 7 3
5 4 3 <-
board =: board flip 5 4 3
board
1 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
move_table legal_moves board
6 3 1 <-
11 7 4
13 8 4
12 8 5
14 9 5
board =: board flip 6 3 1
board
1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
move_table legal_moves board
0 1 3 <-
12 7 3
11 7 4
13 8 4
12 8 5
14 9 5
8 7 6
board =: board flip 0 1 3
board
0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
move_table legal_moves board
11 7 4 <-
13 8 4
12 8 5
14 9 5
8 7 6
board =: board flip 11 7 4
board
0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 1
move_table legal_moves board
8 4 1
3 4 5 <-
12 8 5
14 9 5
9 8 7
13 12 11
board =: board flip 3 4 5
board
0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 1
move_table legal_moves board
9 5 2 <-
13 8 4
9 8 7
13 12 11
board =: board flip 9 5 2
board
0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 1
move_table legal_moves board
13 8 4
12 8 5
13 12 11 <-
board =: board flip 13 12 11
board
0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1
move_table legal_moves board
10 11 12 <-
board =: board flip 10 11 12
board
0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 1
move_table legal_moves board
12 8 5 <-
board =: board flip 12 8 5
board
0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
move_table legal_moves board
5 2 0
2 5 9 <-
board =: board flip 2 5 9
board
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1
move_table legal_moves board
14 9 5 <-
board =: board flip 14 9 5
board
0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
move_table legal_moves board
On Sun, Jun 4, 2017 at 10:03 AM, Raul Miller <[email protected]> wrote:
> Like this?
>
> (#~ 5=2#.@:|])z
> 3 4 5
>
> --
> Raul
>
>
> On Sun, Jun 4, 2017 at 9:43 AM, Michael Rice <[email protected]> wrote:
> > How about
> > 1 0 1 0 1 0 (#~ ((-: & 0 1 0)"1 @: ({~ & z)))~ z
> > ?
> >
> > Odd, that's the KISS way, the way that always works, and the one way I
> > hadn't considered.
> >
> > On to your "simplifications."
> >
> > On Sat, Jun 3, 2017 at 10:16 PM, Louis de Forcrand <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> >
> >> How about
> >> 1 0 1 0 1 0 (#~ ((-: & 0 1 0)"1 @: ({~ & z)))~ z
> >> ?
> >> You can then "simplify":
> >>
> >> First the hook (and {~&z)
> >> ([ #~ -:&0 1 0"1@:(z&{)@])~
> >> ([ #~ -:&0 1 0"1@:(z&{)@])~
> >>
> >> Then ~ can be "distributed" over the resulting fork:
> >> [~ #~ -:&0 1 0"1@:(z&{)@(]~)
> >> ] #~ -:&0 1 0"1@:(z&{)@[
> >>
> >> You can keep going;
> >> From bonding to forks:
> >> ] #~ (] -: 0 1 0"_)"1@:(z { ])@[
> >> Composition and -: commutativity:
> >> ] #~ (0 1 0 -: ])"1@:(z { ]@[)
> >> Because 1=#$0 1 0:
> >> ] #~ (0 1 0 -:"1 ])@:(z { [)
> >> Trains:
> >> ] #~ (0 1 0 -:"1 ]@:(z { [))
> >> ] #~ 0 1 0 -:"1 ]@:(z { ])
> >> ] #~ 0 1 0 -:"1 z { [
> >>
> >> Can't get it any simpler.
> >>
> >> Cheers,
> >> Louis
> >>
> >> > On 4 Jun 2017, at 03:45, Michael Rice <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > z (#~ ((-: & 0 1 0)"1 @: ({~ & z))) 1 0 1 0 1 0
> >>
> >> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
> >>
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
