zman55 wrote:But you seem not to understand how to write a program
to solve it...
What kind of comment is that - why should I care? I solve them with my mind. As I solve more, I get faster. This creates satisfaction.
zman55 wrote:I pretty much can solve any sudoku puzzle with my program..
So can a hundred other coders.
zman55 wrote:As long as I have specific numbers to put into it...
You've already stated that you're happy with multiple solutions, why do you need specific numbers? Here's a hard one for you...
- Code: Select all
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 7 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
zman55 wrote:A solution is a solution and there can more than one right answers some times.
Not amongst the community here. Multiple solutions indicate a poorly-formed puzzle.
zman55 wrote:As far as being lazy. I would like to see you write a simple program that
can solve the 9x9 matrix with no errors.
The lazy comment is a lyric from a song, brought to mind by the ridiculous attitude you are espousing.
zman55 wrote:To prove it... Give me an extremely hard Sudoku Puzzle to Solve...!
(i.e. The more numbers will make it easy and the fewer the numbers will also make it easy for it will have many solutions.)
This would seem to indicate that you don't have a clue what the difference between easy and hard is. Refine your criteria (i.e. insist on only one solution). Even then, you will only have duplicated the work of a hundred other coders.
zman55 wrote:As for laziness...that is all in your point of mind. I don't see you solving Sudoku on an abacus...let alone an old Atari computer! We advance so we use more advance tools... So, why not use program compiling tools to solve a sudoku puzzle...?
Computers see situations, humans see puzzles. If you feed it into a program, you'll arrive at an answer - WHY BOTHER?!
zman55 wrote:They even use similar tools to help with complex chess games.
Who do? You mean online cheats who pretend to be playing you when they're really just feeding out responses from Fritz 8? Is that another example of your pragmatic approach to puzzles?
zman55 wrote:Although, I admit it is much more fun to play one-on-one...!
(And I am far from a master at chess...)
Never mind chess (and number-crunching), I'd just like to know what you know about sudoku.
