No. solitaire 0 10 14
i.e., positions 0 10 and 14 empty. On Tue, Jun 6, 2017 at 9:18 AM, Raul Miller <[email protected]> wrote: > I'm not sure I understand your opening comment here. > > Specifically: > > solitaire 0 > 14 13 12 > 11 12 13 > 3 7 12 > 10 6 3 > 13 12 11 > 9 8 7 > 1 3 6 > 5 4 3 > 11 7 4 > 6 3 1 > 0 2 5 > 5 4 3 > 3 1 0 > solitaire 10 > 14 9 5 > 2 5 9 > 12 8 5 > 9 5 2 > 10 11 12 > 13 12 11 > 1 4 8 > 11 7 4 > 6 3 1 > 2 4 7 > 8 7 6 > 0 1 3 > 3 6 10 > solitaire 14 > 0 1 3 > 6 3 1 > 12 7 3 > 14 13 12 > 9 8 7 > 2 5 9 > 1 3 6 > 6 7 8 > 9 8 7 > 11 12 13 > 4 7 11 > 10 11 12 > 12 13 14 > > (This is with a non-shuffling implementation of search.) > > If you're not getting this, it might be worth looking at where your > intermediate results start conflicting with the ones I've shown here? > > Thanks, > > -- > Raul > > > On Tue, Jun 6, 2017 at 8:53 AM, Michael Rice <[email protected]> wrote: > > For a starting state of positions 0 10 and 14 empty, I can hear my AMD > > FX-8320's fan crank up for about 10 second before returning "No > Solution." > > > > The base example for my peg solitaire endeavors was from "Prolog By > > Example" by Coelho & Cotta, pg. 132. > > > > Here's a nice presentation of representing the problem with Clojure. Just > > click on Chapter 5 and scroll down to "Peg Thing." In Clojure, maps are > > like Lisp's hash-tables, associative data structures. > > > > http://www.braveclojure.com/functional-programming/ > > > > > > On Tue, Jun 6, 2017 at 6:11 AM, 'Mike Day' via Programming < > > [email protected]> wrote: > > > >> My point being, if Michael Rice is exploring how to solve peg > solitaire, > >> it's often useful to work on small(er) problems, before perhaps getting > >> stuck in a long loop, or seeing the memory climb and one's pc seize up > >> and need rebooting. > >> > >> But he'll know all this stuff anyway! > >> > >> BTW, re Raul's useful thoughts on union matters, same thread, earlier > post. > >> I've just noticed that the intersection I posted, ix = [-.-. , is, > >> perhaps, "lazy"; > >> better might be ~.@([-.-.), but neither is appropriate for bit-vector > >> comparisons! > >> > >> Cheers, > >> Mike > >> > >> > >> On 06/06/2017 10:28, Raul Miller wrote: > >> > >>> On Tue, Jun 6, 2017 at 4:09 AM, 'Mike Day' via Programming > >>> <[email protected]> wrote: > >>> > >>>> if I were developing a solver for solitaire, I'd include a variable > as a > >>>> parameter for > >>>> > >>>> the size of problem, eg the number of rows, 1 2 3 etc, or the > >>>> ravel-size, > >>>> eg 1 3 6 etc. > >>>> > >>> You had not specified that previously, but note that implementing this > >>> is a simple change. > >>> > >>> For example: > >>> > >>> flip=: [ ~: i.@#@[ e. ] > >>> > >>> solitaire=:3 :0 > >>> 5 solitaire y > >>> : > >>> path=. (y flip~ 1#~ 0 0.5 0.5 p. x) search i.0 3 > >>> if. #path do. path else. 'No solution' end. > >>> ) > >>> > >>> That said, the 'No solution' cases require a time-consuming exhaustive > >>> search, and in the few tests I did with sizes other than 5, I was > >>> hitting no solution cases. It's time consuming because each > >>> permutation of moves that leads to a final board state gets tested. > >>> > >>> Still, I hope this helps, > >>> > >>> > >> > >> --- > >> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. > >> https://www.avast.com/antivirus > >> > >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> 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
