On Sun, Mar 29, 2015 at 12:03 PM, Marko Rauhamaa <ma...@pacujo.net> wrote: > BartC <b...@freeuk.com>: > >> As Chris mentioned, when I say 'faster than C', I mean X running my >> algorithm was faster then C running Marko's algoritim (on Ian's data). >> This was just an illustration of algorithm being more important than >> language. > > Be careful with the benchmark comparisons. Ian's example can be solved > with the identical algorithm in eight different ways (four corners, left > or right). I ran the example with my recent Python solver and got these > times in the eight cases: > > 884 s > 2.5 s > 13 s > 499 s > 5.9 s > 128 s > 1360 s > 36 s
That sounds to me like either a transcription error was made to the puzzle at some point, or there's something wrong with your solver. The whole point of that example was that it was a puzzle with the minimum number of clues to specify a unique solution. I tried entering that puzzle into the solver at http://www.sudoku-solutions.com/. It confirms that there is a unique solution, and the solution it gives matches the one given in the article as well as the solution that I got from Norvig's solver. Also, Frank Millman successfully ran the Eppstein solver on it upthread, which purportedly should complain if the puzzle does not have a unique solution. -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
