http://www.perlmonks.org?node_id=1010297


in reply to Re^3: The Perl 6 Coding Contest 2012
in thread The Perl 6 Coding Contest 2012

Ignoring questions of optimality, is this legal? (If not, which rule(s) does it violate?)

0 _____ _____ 3 \/ 1 ___ /\ _ 4 \/ \/\/ 2 _ /\ /\/\_ 2 \/ \/ /\ 3 _/\__/\/ \_ 0 /\ 4 _____/ \___ 1

With the rise and rise of 'Social' network sites: 'Computers are making people easier to use everyday'
Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.
"Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority".
In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^5: The Perl 6 Coding Contest 2012
by pKai (Priest) on Dec 26, 2012 at 14:36 UTC
    Each cell of the grid is either empty … or a crossing

    The visualisation of the examples use a character grid but their crossings are not atomic (i.e. characters) but 2x2 sprites. In your last graph you shifted 2 of those (those nearest to the lower right corner) half a grid cell, so that is no longer a rectangular grid.

    Using just 1 character for each atomic cell, an _ for a pass through and an X for a crossing and transliterating O. K. examples we saw in this thread in this way (the "wire" goes on the base line of the number):

    0 1 1X0 2 3 3X2
    0 ________1 1X _______2 2_X ______3 3__X _____4 4___X ____5 5____X ___6 6_____X __7 7______X _8 8_______X 9 9________X0
    0__ __3 1_ X _4 2 X X 2 3X X X0 4_X_X_1

    Due to the half cell shifts in your graphs, none of those can be displayed in this way.


    Update: On reviewing, also in this type of graph a crossing is an X in one cell, but also an empty cell above (mandatory, because otherwise would be an incorrect wiring). So the original constraint formulation ("each cell is one of 2 types") seems indeed not totally fitting.