Hi,
Thanks for the suggestions Christian and George (did you intend to post
to the list George?). For now I have decided I need to make a release
because the previous release has a fairly serious bug. I have done
something quick and easy -- decompose into one constraint to rule out
each tuple. I should come back to this at some point.
I'm tempted to have a go at porting the MDDC and negative MDDC
propagators that I wrote for Minion. However Gecode and Minion are
different enough that I doubt it would be easy.
Pete
On 27/02/15 15:46, Christian Schulte wrote:
Hi Pete,
Yes, I have a brilliant idea: how about you implement a negative table
constraint in Gecode! We would love it.
I think you get the gist: no, there is nothing really...
Cheers
Christian
--
Christian Schulte, KTH, web.it.kth.se/~cschulte/
-----Original Message-----
From: users-boun...@gecode.org [mailto:users-boun...@gecode.org] On Behalf
Of Peter Nightingale
Sent: Friday, February 27, 2015 03:11 PM
To: users@gecode.org
Subject: [gecode-users] Negative table in Gecode
Hi,
I hope you're all well, and thoroughly enjoying your IJCAI reviewing!
I'm working on Savile Row's Gecode (flatzinc) output -- I have a type in SR
for negative table constraints (i.e. the tuple set represents the disallowed
tuples). I don't see anything that looks relevant in registry.cpp.
Obviously turning it into a positive table constraint is an exponential
explosion.
I could decompose into one constraint per tuple -- but of course this is
horrible for propagation.
Can you suggest anything better?
Thanks,
Peter
_______________________________________________
Gecode users mailing list
users@gecode.org
https://www.gecode.org/mailman/listinfo/gecode-users
_______________________________________________
Gecode users mailing list
users@gecode.org
https://www.gecode.org/mailman/listinfo/gecode-users
