- Code: Select all
+-------+-------+-------+
| . . . | 1 3 . | . . . |
| . 1 . | . . 4 | 5 . . |
| . . 2 | . . . | . 6 . |
+-------+-------+-------+
| 1 . . | 3 . . | . 7 . |
| 2 . . | . 5 . | . . 8 |
| . 4 . | . . 6 | . . 9 |
+-------+-------+-------+
| . 5 . | . . . | 7 . . |
| . . 6 | 7 . . | . 9 . |
| . . . | . 8 9 | . . . |
+-------+-------+-------+
...13.....1...45....2....6.1..3...7.2...5...8.4...6..9.5....7....67...9.....89...
Hamberder
3 posts
• Page 1 of 1
Hamberder
by mith » Fri Aug 14, 2020 3:22 pm
- mith
- Posts: 950
- Joined: 14 July 2020
Re: Hamberder
by SpAce » Fri Aug 14, 2020 4:29 pm
I'm being lazy.
(4)r3c1 = (41-3|7|8|9)r3c79 =singles>= !UR(26)r49c79! => +4r3c1; stte
The weird =singles>= strong link means that the strong link itself is valid both ways, as it should be, but the 'singles' qualifier only works from left to right. For that reason I wanted to use an implication instead of a strong link, but it doesn't make sense because of the preceding weak link. Perhaps it would be clearer to write the whole thing as an implication chain to avoid that complication:
-4r3c1 -> 14r3c79 -> -(3|7|8|9)r3c79 ->singles-> !UR(26)r49c79! => +4r3c1; stte
(Then again, if that's reversed the 'singles' qualifier must be dropped.)
- Code: Select all
.--------------------.------------------.--------------------------.
| 6 789 45 | 1 3 2578 | 2489 248 247 |
| 3789 1 3789 | 2689 2679 4 | 5 238 237 |
| a4-5 3789 2 | 589 79 578 | b14'389 6 b14'37 |
:--------------------+------------------+--------------------------:
| 1 689 589 | 3 249 28 | c26+4 7 c26+45 |
| 2 3679 379 | 49 5 17 | 1346 134 8 |
| 3578 4 3578 | 28 127 6 | 123 1235 9 |
:--------------------+------------------+--------------------------:
| 3489 5 13489 | 246 1246 123 | 7 12348 12346 |
| 348 238 6 | 7 124 1235 | 12348 9 12345 |
| 347 237 1347 | 2456 8 9 | c26+134 12345 c26+1345 |
'--------------------'------------------'--------------------------'
(4)r3c1 = (41-3|7|8|9)r3c79 =singles>= !UR(26)r49c79! => +4r3c1; stte
The weird =singles>= strong link means that the strong link itself is valid both ways, as it should be, but the 'singles' qualifier only works from left to right. For that reason I wanted to use an implication instead of a strong link, but it doesn't make sense because of the preceding weak link. Perhaps it would be clearer to write the whole thing as an implication chain to avoid that complication:
-4r3c1 -> 14r3c79 -> -(3|7|8|9)r3c79 ->singles-> !UR(26)r49c79! => +4r3c1; stte
(Then again, if that's reversed the 'singles' qualifier must be dropped.)
Last edited by SpAce on Fri Aug 14, 2020 5:04 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-SpAce-: Show
-
SpAce - Posts: 2671
- Joined: 22 May 2017
Re: Hamberder
by denis_berthier » Fri Aug 14, 2020 5:04 pm
mith wrote:
- Code: Select all
+-------+-------+-------+
| . . . | 1 3 . | . . . |
| . 1 . | . . 4 | 5 . . |
| . . 2 | . . . | . 6 . |
+-------+-------+-------+
| 1 . . | 3 . . | . 7 . |
| 2 . . | . 5 . | . . 8 |
| . 4 . | . . 6 | . . 9 |
+-------+-------+-------+
| . 5 . | . . . | 7 . . |
| . . 6 | 7 . . | . 9 . |
| . . . | . 8 9 | . . . |
+-------+-------+-------+
...13.....1...45....2....6.1..3...7.2...5...8.4...6..9.5....7....67...9.....89...
That one requires more than mere fish, even finned. It is also not enough to add (3D) bivalue-chains. But z-chains are enough.
Hidden Text: Show
- denis_berthier
- 2010 Supporter
- Posts: 3972
- Joined: 19 June 2007
- Location: Paris
3 posts
• Page 1 of 1
