On 3/10/2010 4:49 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
In message, Gabriel
Genellina wrote:
Warnsdorff's algorithm is heuristic ...
Then it shouldn’t be called an “algorithm”.
Heuristic algorithms correctly compute some function, just not the one
you want ;-).
--
http://mail.python.org/mailma
On 2010-03-10, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
> In message , Gabriel
> Genellina wrote:
>
>> Warnsdorff's algorithm is heuristic ...
>
> Then it shouldn???t be called an ???algorithm???.
Why? An algorithm is just a well-defined series of steps.
Just because it uses heuristics doesn't mean it's not
On 2010-03-10 15:49 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
In message, Gabriel
Genellina wrote:
Warnsdorff's algorithm is heuristic ...
Then it shouldn’t be called an “algorithm”.
There are lots of algorithms that use heuristics or are heuristics. The two are
orthogonal concepts.
--
Robert Kern
In message , Gabriel
Genellina wrote:
> Warnsdorff's algorithm is heuristic ...
Then it shouldn’t be called an “algorithm”.
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
On 3/10/2010 12:37 AM, Gabriel Genellina wrote:
if (next != 0):
(self.y, self.x) = (next.y, next.x)
In Python3, next is a builtin function.
Choose a different name, at least in public code ;=).
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
On Wed, 2010-03-10 at 02:37 -0300, Gabriel Genellina wrote:
> Warnsdorff's algorithm is heuristic; it works most of the time, but in
> some cases leads to a dead end and you have to backtrack and try another
> alternative.
> The starting square is important; if you start at 1,1 (instead of 0,0
