aboutsummaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/PuzzleApplet.java
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorSimon Tatham <anakin@pobox.com>2019-04-11 20:30:10 +0100
committerSimon Tatham <anakin@pobox.com>2019-04-11 20:30:10 +0100
commit7ac48f9fe3ff827460b885b50d1e25f1ed2f7862 (patch)
treec51472aa7384a47c71a8a9d6628ad8704f2a09f9 /PuzzleApplet.java
parent1e6e3a815eb67a0d0d369fd0971cf9f3fd9fbf9a (diff)
downloadpuzzles-7ac48f9fe3ff827460b885b50d1e25f1ed2f7862.zip
puzzles-7ac48f9fe3ff827460b885b50d1e25f1ed2f7862.tar.gz
puzzles-7ac48f9fe3ff827460b885b50d1e25f1ed2f7862.tar.bz2
puzzles-7ac48f9fe3ff827460b885b50d1e25f1ed2f7862.tar.xz
Dominosa: further forms of set analysis.
I realised that even with the extra case for a double domino potentially using two squares in a set, I'd missed two tricks. Firstly, if the double domino is _required_ to use two of the squares, you can rule out any placement in which it only uses one. But I was only ruling out those in which it used _none_. Secondly, if you have the same number of squares as dominoes, so that the double domino _can_ but _need not_ use two of the squares, then I previously thought there was no deduction you could make at all. But there is! In that situation, the double does have to use _one_ of the squares, or else there would be only the n-1 heterogeneous dominoes to go round the n squares. So you can still rule out placements for the double which fail to overlap any square in the set, even if you can't (yet) do anything about the other dominoes involved.
Diffstat (limited to 'PuzzleApplet.java')
0 files changed, 0 insertions, 0 deletions